3 ms·
I don’t think many people would base their behaviour off wolves, parrots, gudgeons, mollusks or whatnot. That’s such a random species to choose. If anything, I
by LudwigNagasena 3y ago
I don’t think many people would base their behaviour off wolves, parrots, gudgeons, mollusks or whatnot. That’s such a random species to choose.
If anything, I would conjecture that the causality is actually in reverse: the ideas of pecking orders and dominance hierarchies were well-established in the scientific communities among zoologists and social psychologists (and even in common parlance), so people who studied wolves didn’t question external validity of their studies on captive wolves.
- the_af 3y agoThe wolf is not a random animal. It's a big predator associated in popular culture with aggression and dominance, e.g "a wolf in sheep's clothes", "the wolf of wall street", etc.
- wryoak 3y agoBoth of those describe deceivers (though the latter may not originally have), not aggressors or dominators. Given humanity’s long history of antagonism towards wolves, it is a very strange animal after which to choose to model one’s own behavior.