29 ms·
The Alpha Myth: How captive wolves led us astray
- niemandhier 2y agoI might not be the best possible version of myself but I am at least a release candidate, and therefore have transceded the concepts of „alpha male“ and „beta male“.
- ada1981 2y ago[flagged]
- ToucanLoucan 2y agoTo be honest, while his research certainly didn't do any of this any good, Masculinity as a concept has always been in crisis and it's history winding through our various cultures is one of generations of men criticizing subsequent generations of men for their lack of "correctly" performing masculinity, and, more often than not; explaining how they may reclaim it with this new product that man just happens, by sheer coincidence I'm sure, to be selling. The Alpha/Beta/Sigma/whatever is just the newest and possibly most proliferating style of it, but it is nothing new. As long as men have been writing about Masculinity, they have been writing about other men's failure to embody it correctly. It seemingly only exists to do two things: allow men to demean one another in the public square, and to assist in the sale of products and services to men who feel emasculated in some way by civilized society. The "start" of this (or at least, the earliest documented occurrences of it I know of) were body builders selling workout tips to men in the 1930's who lacked the physiques we decided were how men should look. And since then it's gone on to sell all manner of things: the SUV/Truck obsession we wrangle with was sold heavily on this, since men felt emasculated by minivans (because Detroit told them they were) and later, SUVs became too associated with moms so men get trucks instead now that are functionally identical to SUVs but I digress; the endless parade of supplements, testosterone boosters, hair growth formulas, pills that make you have more and longer erections, basically every workout product ever sold to men has some masculinity angle attached to it, all the way to the more ridiculous shit like dude wipes, which are baby wipes except MANLY, and Axe bodyspray which purports in ads to cause every attractive sub-25-year-old woman in a 2 mile radius crave your dick, on, and on, and on, probably IMHO at least, culminating in the new phenomenon of manliness camps where bros pay tens of thousands of dollars to be hauled into the wilderness (or an industrial park) and be made to perform all manner of bizarre rituals that will fix the hollowness society has engineered inside them, no but for real, this time we pinky promise. Masculinity has always been in crisis and that crisis has been used reliably to sell men all kinds of stupid shit for a century and if we're honest, probably a LOT longer than that.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y agoSpeaking personally, I think it is at least as interesting to ask why some men [0] are not affected much by the sorts of stuff you mention above as why others are so affected. Understanding what types of men are impacted by the masculinity parade and what types are not may prove quite insightful, and may also offer some clues about how to push back against it (for those who need or want to). [0] although I am unquestionably subject to social trends, often without realizing it until years later, none of the list above has ever held any sway over me. I loved our minivan (I even thought it was sexy). I worked out to keep up with some of the women I raced against, not ficticious male standards, I've never used a deodorant, nor paid anyone to take me into the wilderness (I do go there alone, though) etc. etc.
- ToucanLoucan 2y ago> Speaking personally, I think it is at least as interesting to ask why some men [0] are not affected much by the sorts of stuff you mention above as why others are so affected. I think some or all of these following things would push one in the right direction of the cause: - Men are not urged in any way to develop social skills while growing up; such things are solely the domain of women and girls. Speaking your feelings is girly. Resolving conflicts in non-violent ways is girly. This results in a lifetime of sub-optimal social operation and thus a lifetime of lesser-or-un-met social needs. Men often post online about craving affection, sexual or otherwise, but lack the vocabulary to ask for it, if they even have relationships in their lives that would connect them with the people they need to ask. - In fact, quite the opposite, boys are socialized to scrabble and fight over everything: feminine attention, social status, access to scarce resources, all can prompt fights in schools, on busses, etc. When bullies would steal my lunch as a kiddo, my dad encouraged me to fight them, because you can't simply ask a young boy to not harm another young boy; you have to prove yourself threatening to that boy, so he will pick on someone else who is less so. And like, credit where due, his advice worked, even if it costed me a tiny piece of my humanity. - Many man-centered hobbies also require money, which pushes men and boys into employment earlier than their female counterparts. The act of earning money itself is highly masculine; the "breadwinner" is the husband, it's a trope for a reason. Even decades after women have entered the workforce in a big way, and a single-income household is all but a fantasy for the upper middle class and above, this still holds. And this one isn't even just enforced by men: women, rightfully so due to economic pressures, demand a man earn his keep too in order to be even considered relationship material. And like... again, she's right to, because single income households are practically unheard of these days.
- erikerikson 2y agoWhy copy the article from the link?
- url00 2y agoNo doubt because most people won't click the link.
- nejsjsjsbsb 2y agoMight be a bot?
- ada1981 2y agoI figured it would be easier for people to read it here and not leave HN. Worse for getting views I guess. But, it's got a lot of upvotes so maybe that helped. Didn't expect it to hit #3 spot today.
- erikerikson 2y agoI have to admit I sometimes only read comments but while I upvoted the article (thank you for writing it), I downvoted your copy-of-the-text comment. Not sure the community opinion but that isn't normal in my observation and based on the upvotes I'm getting on my question, I would advise against the duplication in the future. It's a little picayune, I apologize, but part of what makes HN great is a higher signal to noise ratio. Thanks again for the insightful article!
- ada1981 2y agoI've never shared the text in the first comment, although I have a memory of seeing it done previously but not often. It's also the first time one of my articles hit the front page and I can't help but think that was part of the reason -- people were happy to read but not click. I'll consider it or perhaps do a condensed version of the article as a comment. Curious, did you downvote because it seemed to violate the norms, or did it have a negative experience for you? Or was the negative experience seeing it violate the norms, or something else. Thanks for the upvotes (and down votes!) and comments.
- Terr_ 2y agoI often like to sum it up as: "Thinking gangs observed in prison represent human households." This goes along with an imagined mockumentary, narrated by a David Attenborough figure, ex: "In the living room, a confrontation is brewing. The Big Boss has informed the bottom-tier Henchmen Homies that it is time for lights-out, but they are not ready to leave the television and they resent the privileges of the older Made Man, who is permitted to remain. This is a problem for the Big Boss, since directly punishing them might undermine his claim to control the group as a whole. Fortunately for him, his Enforcer is arriving from the kitchen, attracted by the noise..."
- HPsquared 2y agoMaybe not all households, but some. And schools bear more than a passing resemblance to prisons.
- bestouff 2y agoDepends on the country.
- eleveriven 2y agoYet it interesting how much of what we consider "human nature" is just us reacting to the cages we put ourselves in?
- micromacrofoot 2y agoIt's stunning how so much of our own behavior, or at least explanations of it, reference what turns out to be almost entirely false conclusions. It could take 100 years to undo.
- deepsquirrelnet 2y agoA more cynical take could be that maybe it fits because we’ve constructed our own captivity or ‘prison conditions’ where this tends to emerge.
- zitsarethecure 2y agoOut of curiosity, what conditions would you describe as prison-like that would drive someone to adopt an "alpha male" lifestyle in the US?
- deepsquirrelnet 2y ago> Consider how this plays out in Silicon Valley, where the "move fast and break things" mentality has created a leadership culture that celebrates disruption over sustainability, dominance over collaboration. That’s how the article phrased it. I’m not certain if I agree or not, but I’m not ready to either accept or dismiss it.
- readthenotes1 2y agoBefore we start dishing on sociology as junk science, I'd like to point out that a lot of what we consider science as junk science. For instance, take the myth of RICE to treat injuries. The myth lived for over 30 years before being debunked, but even a decade after it was soundly routed, we still find the advice in the wild. https://thesportjournal.org/article/the-r-i-c-e-protocol-is-a-myth-a-review-and-recommendations/ https://thesportjournal.org/article/the-r-i-c-e-protocol-is-...
- mmooss 2y ago> Before we start dishing on sociology as junk science How is sociology involved in this subthread or the OP? In the OP, the researchers have straightened out the issue and the general public ias confused.
- bulatb 2y agoPeople didn't get their worldview from the myth. They like the myth because it fits their worldview.
- Fricken 2y ago>In their natural habitat, wolf packs operated nothing like the prison-yard dynamics he'd observed in the zoo. Human's aren't in their natural habit most of the time either. "Prison-yard dynamics" is how the public education system functions. This is where our children are socialized.
- mettamage 2y agoHigh school is more complex as there is a life outside it where other dynamics can be observed. At least that's what I noticed and it made me realize that the popularity contest in high school was a farce.
- vkou 2y ago> it made me realize that the popularity contest in high school was a farce. Observing outside life has led me to conclude that the high school popularity contest, is, in fact, the most authentic, freest form of human social behavior.
- throwaway2037 2y agoI agree 100%. I could only see it in the last year or two: Instagram allows people to maintain high school popularity in adult life. Before Insta, those people faded into oblivion because there was no global platform to amplify their good looks or likeable personality. (There were still popular, but in much smaller social circles.) After Insta, "high school popular" people can maintain it indefinitely.
- blackqueeriroh 2y agoLmao “I’m mad some people look nicer than me and know how to be kind to people. They suck and are only popular because of Instagram.” My guy, comb your hair, take a shower, put on deodorant and a clean shirt. You’re fine.
- bandrami 2y agoWasn't there a guy who did the "rats prefer cocaine to food" study but without having the rats isolated in individual cages, and it turns out that no, they don't actually prefer cocaine to food when they aren't (essentially) in solitary?
- hinkley 2y agoYep. Hopelessness keeps you on the drugs as much as biochemistry. Kicking any bad habit is easier if you have something to replace it with.
- _yb2s 2y agoYou’re talking about the Rat Park study. That one is also controversial and hasn’t successfully replicated. Personally I think the general idea of a connection between emotional trauma and addiction is pretty obvious, but also a but more complex than the Rat Park study implies or assumes.
- mandmandam 2y ago> hasn’t successfully replicated To be clear, lots of studies have shown that animals in richer environments do less drugs; though the effect doesn't seem to be as strong as Alexander claimed.
- uqual 2y agoWe have many real life human "experiments" that can be looked to in determining if the "alpha" concept is a "more successful" model in business. This is particularly true in areas where demand for highly qualified employees outstrips supply - such as many flavors of software development. If the 'alpha' model is universally detrimental to success in business, it would quickly die out. However it has not and most modern (and premodern) successful companies (by metrics of growth, profit, income, revenue, PE etc) have been founded and grown by "alpha" leaders and staff. There are of course exceptions but we would expect the "alpha" model to instead be the exception if it was a less successful way of running a business. In practice, both can co-exist and as a company matures it may, over time, switch between models. Some people like the driven competitive environment and seek it out and will tend to end up at enterprises that favor the "alpha" model. Others who dislike such environments will seek out enterprises that utilize alternative models. An individual will likely be more productive in the environment best suited for them and an individual will rarely switch from a strong preference for one of these environments to a strong preference for an alternative environment. If there is substantial dissatisfaction on the part of workers with the "alpha" model and an alternative model would be more productive and successful, startups would blossom that use alternative models and hire away the cream of the crop of the "alpha" companies' employees.
- stackghost 2y ago>However it has not and most modern (and premodern) successful companies (by metrics of growth, profit, income, revenue, PE etc) have been founded and grown by "alpha" leaders and staff. Citation needed. By my estimation, the overwhelming majority of CEOs are doughy, effete city slickers who are the exact opposite of the prototypical "alpha male" image. Zuckerberg, with his MMA training, might be the only one I can think of that fits the stereotype. Don't confuse the putative "alpha male" with simply being a douchebag, because I can think of quite a large number of CEOs that fit that latter description, but it's not the same thing.
- dsr_ 2y agoAnd by definition, Zuckerberg didn't start out as an "alpha", but decided to emulate one after he was already super-wealthy.
- LudwigNagasena 2y agoThe abuse of the captive wolves research factoid is officially run into the ground. We now blame it for the whole organisation of humanity. I thought bashing online communities for using “alpha” was inadequate, but that takes the cake.
- ada1981 2y agoI don't intend to put the blame on the wolf study. I think it's more that we are in captivity, and exhibit deeply unhealthy relationship patterns with pretty much our entire environment from food, to women, to time itself.
- goatlover 2y agoThis assumes hunter gatherers were better off than we are today. That's a controversial claim. You still have to survive in nature with finding food and making shelter, fending off predators, negotiating rival groups, dealing with disease and injury. It wasn't some utopian existence.
- ada1981 2y agoI think there are good arguments that Hunter gathers ate healthier more diverse foods; spent less time working; and likely were in flow more often than we are today. I think Sapiens talks about this.
- LudwigNagasena 2y agoThe title says that captive wolves led us astray and the first paragraph asserts that the studies spawned decades of misunderstanding about power, leadership, and masculinity. The causal link is very dubious to say the least.
- robocat 2y agoThe fact the wolf alpha male theory was wrong doesn't imply we don't have alpha dominance for men. Do we use alpha male gorillas to explain the concept? (Edit) Or Chimpanzees: https://news.janegoodall.org/2018/07/10/top-bottom-chimpanzee-social-hierarchy-amazing/ https://news.janegoodall.org/2018/07/10/top-bottom-chimpanze... The highest-ranking chimpanzee in a group is the alpha-male. These males climb their way to the top of the chimpanzee hierarchy, and the ways they choose to do so can differ with the personality of the individual leader. Take two of the alpha males observed in Gombe, Frodo and Freud, for instance. Though they were brothers, each chimp had a very different leadership style. While Freud maintained control through fostering strong alliances and grooming those he wanted to keep under his command, Frodo relied heavily on aggression and brute strength.
- dsr_ 2y agoThe fact that the evidence doesn't exist doesn't imply the phenomenon doesn't exist? Remind me, why gorillas and not chimps? Why chimps and not bonobos? Why assume that two related species with completely different environmental niches must share a social structure?
- goatlover 2y agoGorillas, Chimpanzees and Baboons are similar in their social structures with the dominant alpha males. Bonobos are different with it being matriarchal and conflict resolution being less violent.
- TheOtherHobbes 2y agoSadly not that simple. https://cosmosmagazine.com/nature/animals/bonobos-arent-as-peaceful-as-previously-thought/ https://cosmosmagazine.com/nature/animals/bonobos-arent-as-p...
- lmm 2y ago> The fact that the evidence doesn't exist doesn't imply the phenomenon doesn't exist? Wolves were never meant to be evidence. They were a model, a metaphor. I wonder how many people who complain about "believing the myth of alpha wolves" are the same people who defend astrology as a "useful way of thinking, whether it's true or not".
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- vunderba 2y agoFrom the article: > Instead of ruling from above, he built a flat structure where decisions emerge from collaboration. I've also seen the flip-side of this - where due to the fact that there is no established hierarchy, you spend inordinate amounts of time welding entirely disparate architectures together since every team was cowboy coding and doing their own thing. Also anecdotally, I've never once experienced this Type-A prima donna alpha engineer but I've had absolutely zero interest in working for a FAANG. Every engineer I've ever worked with was pretty easy-going.
- FrustratedMonky 2y ago" Type-A prima donna alpha engineer " Most are bluster. Talk loud and fast and be rude, arrogant, and lot of people will think you must really know what you are doing.
- tayo42 2y ago> Every engineer I've ever worked with was pretty easy-going. Every one seems easy going until you disagree with them.
- rramadass 2y agoHa, Ha; True. For some reason people don't want to face reality but want to believe in fancies/stories which they have picked up from surrounding society. Related, the Norwegian documentary series "Hjernevask" (i.e. Brainwash) is interesting - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hjernevask https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hjernevask
- robwwilliams 2y agoDubious article. The role of aggression in establishing and maintaining social hierarchies was not mis-diagnosed in 1974. The behaviors of alpha males (wolves) and alpha females (hyenas) are complex but threat and pain is part of the pattern. Highly variable by species, environment, and demographics. Go over the hills from Silicon Valley to Ano Nuevo Marine Conservation Area and watch the behavior of male elephant seals like Bernie LeBoef has done for 30 years. How does any of this apply to Silicon Valley other than as a cute and wrong metaphor? Are we really taking leads from dogs?
- mmooss 2y agoThe popular trend in U.S. big business is 'animal spirits'. I read an article about how at Davos (iirc), people were bullish on the U.S. and bearish on Europe because the U.S. embraced "animal spirits". Animal brains too.
- nico 2y agoSomething similar happened with models for addiction in rats (which were extrapolated to humans) It turned out that rats that live in a nice environment, with plenty of activities and social spaces (not an ugly, mostly empty cage), don’t become addicted Ref: Rat Park experiment
- Analemma_ 2y agoThe Internet loves the Rat Park experiment, but it never replicated and should be considered just as bogus as all the other stuff in social psych which hasn't survived the replication crisis. It's fitting for this thread though, because it survives for the exact reason the alpha wolf stuff survives: people love the story so they hang on to it irrespective of the science.
- nradov 2y agoRight, and we've seen plenty of people who lead the "Rat Park" equivalent of human lives and yet still get addicted to opioids. There's clearly no single cause.
- sunjieming 2y agoI think 90% of my HS psych class didn't replicate
- layman51 2y agoCan you elaborate more on this? I did not take psychology in high school, but I would imagine that such a course would focus on fundamental concepts where “replicating” wouldn’t even be an issue. There might be teachers who might bring up the pop-sci topics, but wouldn’t the meat of the class just be learning about theories or frameworks?
- throwup238 2y agoNot the OP and I didn’t take psych but here’s an example syllabus for AP Psychology from the College Board: https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap-psychology-sample-syllabus-1.pdf https://apcentral.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/ap-psychology-s... The first two units on neurology and cognition seem sensible, but I can see how it’ll quickly go off the rails after that.
- kristopolous 2y agoRegardless of the accuracy, analogizing to humans is absurd. Some spiders eat their partner after mating, should we do that? Some animals defecate to mark territory, should we do that? Many abandon their children after birth or even eat their babies. Maybe we should use artificial ovipositors and proboscises. People want to ordain their ideology with the notion of natural order to claim it as scientific law. The accuracy of the underlying animal claim is irrelevant because the logic connecting some random animal to humans is nonsense.
- ada1981 2y ago>> Some spiders eat their partner after mating, should we do that? Have you spent time with many married couples? ;)
- itishappy 2y agoI think causation is reversed. The goal of studies like these is not to dictate how we should behave, but to inform us how we might. Should we use our feces to mark territory? Probably not, but when the concept of marking territory is as pervasive as it is then maybe it's worth considering how we would like to handle it to avoid falling back to feces.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- kristopolous 2y agoAgain, pervasiveness does not magically make it valid. Many animals eat feces, that's extremely pervasive. It's an intrinsic part of the ecosystem. It's really hard to overstate how important poop from other animals is. Doesn't mean I should be cooking it for dinner. Applying any behavior as having any meaning at all to humans, whether it be wolves or lobsters, other than that we should respect it, is complete nonsense. There are no lessons to learn about how we should structure our workspace or allocate tax dollars by watching how jellyfish or seasnails live, any claim otherwise is merely ideological projection and creative license.
- korse 2y agoDid anyone consider that our society IS artificial conditions? Not sure about you all, but western society feels much more akin to a zoo than the wilderness.
- jmye 2y agoI don’t understand what you mean. That you can certainly opt in to artificial nonsense, as wholeheartedly and completely as you want, doesn’t mean society is artificial. It just means that’s the part you’ve decided to live your life in.
- tolerance 2y agoC’mon now, you know what he means. Or you’ve got a decent idea of what he might mean. People are beginning to consider that the most pervasive aspects of society—parts that you don’t have a choice whether you’re a part of it or confronted by it—are social constructs, and that humans are constrained in what they’re allowed to believe in and how to come to terms with those beliefs amongst one another.
- TheOtherHobbes 2y agoYou're far more likely to be eaten alive by something in the wilderness than in a corporate office. If we've achieved nothing else, at least we've added a layer of political and economic indirection to our cannibalism.
- ssnistfajen 2y agoThis is what I've been leaning towards after initially renouncing the experiment for its arbitrary nature. "Alpha" behaviour emerge in zero-sum/artificial scarcity situations, yet contemporary society is full of zero-sum situations and artificial scarcity due to market inefficiency and gatekeeping. It's not just Western society either. If anything, Western-aligned industrialized societies experience far less scarcity. So the behavioural pattern shouldn't be entirely dismissed as pseudoscience, but worthy of critical inspection and reference.
- 2y ago
- jarjoura 2y agoSeems like it's fair to assume, both canines and humans are highly adaptable, and we behave the way we need to in the environment we're in. My dog has never shown me anything except love and compassion, and that gets him the best living conditions, back scratches and the tastiest food.
- lmm 2y ago> Seems like it's fair to assume, both canines and humans are highly adaptable, and we behave the way we need to in the environment we're in. If that were as true as you seem to be suggesting, there would be no difference between dogs and wolves when the latter are kept as pets, which is clearly false.
- barrettondricka 2y agoAuthor: Applying behavior of wolves in captivity to humans was a mistake. Also Auther: Applies behavior of wolves in free environment to a very specific and complex part of human society. And of course, zero link or citations on anything.
- ninetyninenine 2y agoAlphas aren't only observed in captive wolves. They are observed in MANY MANY animal groups. I think the full picture isn't some liberal idea where everyone lives in harmony and can work together for the common good without the weakest link ever getting left behind. The truth is it's a bit of both. We live in a world where it's dog eat dog but also companionship and working together are BOTH effective strategies for survival. Most humans are programmed to be able to handle both modes of survival . Depending on circumstance one strategy often becomes critical for survival. For example: if you're in captivity or aka a setting with very very limited resources the alpha strategy works best. Of course no citations for me either. But I think it's quite clear the author is biased.
- nis0s 2y agoYou’re right. Antarctic penguins and walruses are good examples of this. Penguin females go hunting, while the males hatch eggs and rear the young till the females return. Walrus males, OTOH, absolutely dominate other walrus males, and keep a harem of females. But who cares? Humans are more closely related to primates than other animals, who exhibit all kinds of different behaviors across species. I am not sure why we’re trying to model human behaviors from wolves at all. In fact, human advanced cognitive development is unique amongst the entirety of the animal kingdom, so it’s okay if humans have behaviors which are unique just to us, and are unobserved in other animals.
- roughly 2y agoThere’s a recent book, “Bitch: On the Female of the Species” by Lucy Cooke, which specifically targets the traditional “strong males weak females is the natural order” trope. It’s brilliantly written, comprehensive in its dismantling of the concept, and a very fun read (side note: I have a habit of reading in bars, and this one got a lot of looks) https://bookshop.org/p/books/bitch-on-the-female-of-the-species-lucy-cooke/17442640 https://bookshop.org/p/books/bitch-on-the-female-of-the-spec...
- llm_nerd 2y agoThe original researcher did correct the record about what entails the alpha wolf in a natural setting, noting that pack leadership was usually based upon familial group dynamics, instead of the cliche biggest and strongest that beat down opponents, but in pop science this correction went too far, basically discounting the idea of an alpha wolf altogether. In virtually every discussion about this myth people will regurgitate the notion that there is no alpha. But...there is. He never claimed there wasn't an alpha. Just that the selection among a group of wolves forced together differs from a group of wolves in a natural setting. So Tony Soprano was the alpha of the crime family even though many other characters were likely stronger, crazier, etc. He had the backing of so many people that they knew that his bark had bite, even if it wasn't from him directly.
- indoordin0saur 2y ago> noting that pack leadership was usually based upon familial group dynamics, instead of the cliche biggest and strongest that beat down opponents So, sounds like if the author read the study more closely and continued with his idea of basing human society around dog society we should structure society as a hereditary monarchy rather than rule by warrior kings.
- stonesthrowaway 2y ago[flagged]
- steve_taylor 2y agoAcknowledging the existence of hierarchies in nature is now politically incorrect. You're only allowed to believe that they're an artificial construct fabricated by a money-hungry capitalist boomer cabal to oppress you.
- cutemonster 2y agoI don't want HN to be a place where people call others "clown" and "fucking joke". Apart from that, interesting to see your thoughts
- justonenote 2y agoAnd what about chimpanzees? Our closest relative genetically. Is anyone disputing that they exhibit a brutally dominant social hierarchy? Our second closest relative is (afaik, or close enough) Bonobos, who lump around all day jacking each other off. While the alpha terminology may have come from dog packs, it's not exactly unobservable in other species, and even on these forums and in VC funding rounds you can observe people both jacking each other off with a healthy amount of social and institutional pandering and financial support, and other people not posting as much but taking dominant positions to "secure the bag" and whatever is downstream from that. People don't like these conversations but it doesn't change the reality.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y agoYou can’t draw more than rudimentary conclusions from the comparison because we could have evolved different behaviors, or we could share them, or we could work that way on the savannah but not in a city, etc. These conversations can be and are used to say whatever the speaker wants to say, since they can just select a trait that’s been observed in a monkey case study and apply it lazily to humans. “Wow humans sure like to jerk off, must be because we’re like bonobos!”
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y agoMaybe a thing to note here is that the behavior of many different kinds of social animals changes dependent on the living situation. Given that, it is not unreasonable to wonder (hope?) that there might be human living conditions that reduce "brutally dominant social heirarchy". The best part is: we even appear to have archeological evidence that this is true, for humans!
- dylan604 2y ago> reduce "brutally dominant social heirarchy". if you mean literal brutality, but how the uber wealthy treating those of lower wealth could be considered brutal as well--in modern parlance of course.
- 2y ago
- jaco6 2y ago[dead]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- kazinator 2y agoIf the animals are spread over a wide area, where they don't have to compete for territory or resources with each other, of course the dominant behaviors won't rear themselves. You need the right conditions to repro the behavior. E.g. for starters, you cannot study one wolf in isolation from other wolves, right? You need at least two for one to dominate the other, and they can't be miles apart such that they never meet.
- motohagiography 2y agoin any competence where you've taken instruction, you need to be practicing at a certain level to be able to receive meaningful direction or guidance. the same is true for leadership. the model in the article seems like a bit of a straw man that plays to a sense of resentfulness about cartoons of "alpha" figures, and it may ultimately be misleading by creating misguided critics. just lift, read the stoics, and master something. you'll get there.
- teruakohatu 2y agoIf the Alpha Wolf is a myth, it is also a myth that the concept was bought to popular imagination by Rudolf Schenkel and L. David Mech between the 1940 and 1970s. Jack London's gold rush books explore this concept in detail, the first of which, Call of the Wild, was published in 1903. These were very popular books, then and still today. The alpha wolf concept was in public psyche at least in the early 1900s, but probably earlier too. I don't think it is likely that London invented this myth himself and it existed earlier.
- rramadass 2y agoRight. The myth actually originates from Social Darwinism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism which was what influenced Jack London's thinking (see "The Call of the Wild", "White Fang" etc.) but at the same time he was also a Socialist (see "The Iron Heel", "The People of the Abyss" etc.) See his "views" section here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_London#Views https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_London#Views
- samth 2y agoJust to be clear, the word "alpha" does not appear in the text of "Call of the Wild".
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- steve_taylor 2y agoWhen a Canadian psychologist mentioned lobsters and hierarchies, the dogma to which members of a political group subscribe was updated to include the denial of alphas as a natural phenomenon, making it instead an artificial construct invented by their imaginary oppressors to hold onto imaginary power.
- WesternWind 2y agoblaming the wolves is an interesting choice.
- sakoht 2y agoReads like a Disney lens on nature. Whether or not wolves have a single alpha in a pack, nature is built around selfishness and violence with certainty, cooperation selectively. Animals watch each other suffer and die without a flinch all the time. And nearly everything dies from being eaten. Any lens on nature that sugar-coats this is projecting human values.
- otabdeveloper4 2y ago> selfishness and violence Are human emotions, please don't anthropomorphise.
- lIl-IIIl 2y agoNeither of those are emotions. Selfishness is the default setting, and is easy to explain in evolutionary terms. Unselfishness is what usually surprises us when we see it in animals.
- culi 2y agoSurprises you perhaps. Over 90% of plants rely on cooperation with mycorrhizal fungal networks. The evolution of lichen, a partnership between fungi and lichen, has happened independently tens of thousands of times. Our very cells rely on a once-alien cell with its own DNA that is now called the "mitochondria" for our very survival. Even still, the majority of cells in the human body are usually non-human. We literally couldn't eat a single thing without the complex multi-species microbes we rely on. Cooperation is at the basis of all of nature. The difference between "competition" and "cooperation" is usually a matter of perspective and human bias. They are two sides of the same coin. We fit details about nature into one of those two frameworks to uphold a specific worldview we find useful for organizing information. Historically we've favored the competition framework, but take a look at the Annual Reviews journals for a field like Ecology, Mycology, Biology, etc and I think you'll see this is quickly changing
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> Reads like a Disney lens on nature The author isn't saying nature isn't cruel. They're saying wolf packs don't work the way we imagine them to in popular culture. You don't have males duking it out to be the alpha. (That's closer to gorillas and chimpanzees, though even among them it's rare.) You have a breeding pair and their pups. Wolf packs aren't monarchies, they're emergent clusters of wolves around a breeding pair that goes away when the breeding pair perishes. A younger wolf "challenging" an older wolf for dominance isn't the natural state; it's the space-constrained state that emerges in captivity. (Even that might be giving it too much credit.)
- eleveriven 2y agoThe performative dominance described here feels eerily familiar
- WuxiFingerHold 2y agoExtremely interesting topic, unfortunately shallow article. Still I'm happy for the input. I'd like to learn more about how abundance of food, lack of threats and other comforts of civilization distort the formerly vital instincts into all kind of dysfunctional and harming behavior. And more importantly, how to manage those.
- reasonableout 2y agowd
- sharkbird2 2y agoI feel like the term "alpha" is deeply problematic since different people use it to mean completely different things. Many people associate it with the toxic traits of dominating others through aggression. While other's use it to reference a healthy, good, strong, well developed and balanced individual who helps others. I think we need new terms for these things so we can start differentiate them.
- roland35 2y agoThe problem is that people who use the toxic definition of alpha really like it! There is no motivation to change sadly.
- getnormality 2y agoNo matter what new terms are invented, people will reinterpret them to align with their own perspectives. If "alpha" means good in some social context, people will load it up with all the contradictory qualities that different people consider good.
- DavidPiper 2y agoSurprised not to see David Graeber's "The Dawn of Everything" recommended yet in a thread like this. It details how "pre-modern" societies functioned based on the available archaeological and anthropological evidence we have, and one of its key findings is just how much human history conflicts with narratives like "the alpha myth". It also goes into detail about how we ended up with so many social narratives like it that just don't have any justifiable precedent.
- 1oooqooq 2y agothis is way above the audience. this conversation is unfortunately like talking about garbage collector algorithms in different architectures, to social science grads. but in the rare case a social scientist want to lear about memory borrowing, i would also suggest somethig more recent (and less anachist to this crowd) https://ia804705.us.archive.org/13/items/byung-chul-han-the-burnout-society-2015-stanford-briefs-libgen.lc/Byung-Chul%20Han%20-%20The%20Burnout%20Society%20%282015%2C%20Stanford%20Briefs%29%20-%20libgen.lc.pdf https://ia804705.us.archive.org/13/items/byung-chul-han-the-...
- mattgreenrocks 2y agoI've had that (The Burnout Society) on my to-read list for awhile, do you recommend it? I think the core thesis is spot on from what I've seen of discussions, and am looking to decide which aspects of ambition are my own, and which have I have accepted unconsciously.
- DavidPiper 2y agoCoincidentally, I actually re-read The Burnout Society a few months ago while I was listening to The Dawn of Everything. I strongly recommend The Burnout Society, though I think it tackles these issues from a different perspective: "how we compromise ourselves in service of the (false) personal and societal narratives we've constructed". A more direct line to The Dawn of Everything in the sense of "how did we construct these narratives in the first place?" would probably be Humankind: A Hopeful History by Rutger Bregman. Coincidentally for this thread, it also includes a chapter on the results of real wolf domestication studies (and how it affects animal behaviour) in past decades.
- danlugo92 2y ago1. There's still other species where an "alpha" exists. 2. Even if there's no other species where an "alpha" exists, what forbids us from it being a human thing? No that I want to look up to a mere mortal "alpha" e.g. dictators. Only real alpha is Christ. 3. There's always an alpha in friend groups, I've seen it, should I pluck out my eyes as they're lying to me? Heck no. Doesn't mean the women in the friend group took turns doing you know what to his you know what. An alpha is simple a leader, online manosphere groups took it to the extreme of being "the guy that gets most girls" but in truth being known helps with that whole thing. 4. Even my previous 3 points didn't resonate with you, it's just an allegory, I don't know why this particular alpha thing has hit a nerve with some many people, that even whole ass articles have been written up against it, what is the problem with men aspiring to be better? An alpha shares his spoils anyways, in Lions in Hyenas in Coyotes, etc.
- fedeb95 2y agoI find your lack of sources... disturbing.
- flanked-evergl 2y agoI think the path forward requires rejecting appeals to nature. "Darwinism can be used to back up two mad moralities, but it cannot be used to back up a single sane one. The kinship and competition of all living creatures can be used as a reason for being insanely cruel or insanely sentimental; but not for a healthy love of animals. On the evolutionary basis you may be inhumane, or you may be absurdly humane; but you cannot be human. That you and a tiger are one may be a reason for being tender to a tiger. Or it may be a reason for being as cruel as the tiger. It is one way to train the tiger to imitate you, it is a shorter way to imitate the tiger. But in neither case does evolution tell you how to treat a tiger reasonably, that is, to admire his stripes while avoiding his claws. If you want to treat a tiger reasonably, you must go back to the garden of Eden. For the obstinate reminder continued to recur: only the supernatural has taken a sane view of Nature. The essence of all pantheism, evolutionism, and modern cosmic religion is really in this proposition: that Nature is our mother. Unfortunately, if you regard Nature as a mother, you discover that she is a step-mother. The main point of Christianity was this: that Nature is not our mother: Nature is our sister. We can be proud of her beauty, since we have the same father; but she has no authority over us; we have to admire, but not to imitate. This gives to the typically Christian pleasure in this earth a strange touch of lightness that is almost frivolity. Nature was a solemn mother to the worshippers of Isis and Cybele. Nature was a solemn mother to Wordsworth or to Emerson. But Nature is not solemn to Francis of Assisi or to George Herbert. To St. Francis, Nature is a sister, and even a younger sister: a little, dancing sister, to be laughed at as well as loved." ~ Chesterton
- indoordin0saur 2y agoYup. This whole article is just a glaring case of the naturalistic fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy) You don't need to argue that "alpha males" don't exist amongst wild animals to make that case that it's bad for human civilization.
- mattgreenrocks 2y agoI find it fascinating that some users here seem to be attached to the concept of an alpha male, reality be damned. It’s clear that this meets some emotional/psychological need for them. I regard it as a dangerous mind virus. It is hard to rid yourself of it even if you see it is bullshit and harming you because it requires a substantial change in how you see your life. I think that’s because it is some hard truths (“people like powerful people”) mixed in with some cognitive distortions (“dominance is the primary mediator of all interactions”). The lack of a true definition means there is no objective measure of what it is, which makes it impossible to feel secure in. Thus, the endless arguing about whether behavior is really “alpha” or “beta.” There are good bits there, such as not letting yourself be pushed around. But that doesn’t make it all good or true. I really think the whole artifice is a cop-out for actually doing the work of individuation and self-development because you outsource all the hard work of deciding what you want to be and the temporary, self-imposed emotional exile it takes to actually discern that to following guidelines ultimately given to you by other people. You’re still not crafting your own life, you’re just changing who you get your life script from. It exploits psychological vulnerabilities in people and traps them: if you worry about your alpha/beta status, then you’ll be the type of person who wants to fix it, but there isn’t a fix because your perspective is the issue. Hope that was helpful for someone.
- otikik 2y agoThis was very well put. Thanks.
- stonesthrowaway 2y ago[flagged]
- dspillett 2y agoI think in part it is that the flawed study might actually be relevant to them because of the flaw. It studied captive wolves in an unnaturally constrained (and therefore competitive) environment, and that is how some people feel a lot of the time. Trying to be the alpha in such a situation, so they can look down at the others and feel better, instead of doing anything to try actually improve the world, is an unhealthy reaction, but one I can at least understand. Trying to be an “alpha” irrespective and create that sort of situation for others, on the other hand, is rather despicable. Another factor in the longevity of alpha/beta/other designations is that they don't only come from that study (and those that followed it, or it referenced). The terms were used elsewhere both in science and fiction (and, specifically, in well known science fiction such as Huxley's “Brave New World” which pre-dates the publication of Schenkel's infamous wolf study by a decade and a half).
- BurningFrog 2y agoThis essay is decent workplace leadership advice. The connection to wolf pack social dynamics is very thin.
- P_I_Staker 2y agoI'm in disagree. They wolves tent to have a "big bad wolf". Now most wolves would never enter a house and eat bear soup, but some ofthe are quit psychopathic and can bring food back for the pack. What this article doesn't mention is the eating of puppies. The big bad wolf is not a gentle wolf.
- midhunsezhi 2y agoGreat article but is missing sources with citations so I ran the content against GPTZero's source finder - https://app.gptzero.me/documents/124f8c4d-9fd4-43c4-93f9-713164978904/share https://app.gptzero.me/documents/124f8c4d-9fd4-43c4-93f9-713...
- karaterobot 2y agoForget the captivity part, the fact that people aren't wolves is what always bothered me about this dumb idea.
- muzani 2y agoI feel that rather than disproving the alpha myth, this emphasizes that it works well in cages. What makes a cage? I'd say something where sustainability is a factor - there are limited leads, limited work, limited territory. People slow down otherwise they become too productive, deplete the work available, and get laid off. Hierarchies evolve around controlling these limited resources. All the danger is internal. There's constant resources coming in from god knows where, so budgeting takes priority over hunting.
- indoordin0saur 2y agoYes. It seems almost like a tautology that alphas arise in environments with scarcity and competition.
- indoordin0saur 2y agoThe author obviously wants to critique the machismo culture built into capitalism (which is totally fine!) but he seems to inherently subscribe to the naturalistic fallacy without being aware of it. Thus he feels the need to dismiss the idea of "alpha male" hierarchies in nature as non-existent as a way to dismiss them within our own society. You really don't need to do this and IMO, the flimsy premise of the start of his argument undermines his conclusion for society (which I actually agree with). Just because a certain type of sociological system exists within nature doesn't mean it's one we, as humans, should want for ourselves.
- spandrew 2y ago> Consider how these dynamics manifest in Silicon Valley, where Facebook's infamous "move fast and break things" mantra shaped a generation of tech culture. This emphasis on speed and disruption at any cost has created work environments that mirror the artificial pressures of captivity, where displaying dominance often takes precedence over fostering sustainable innovation. – Yeaa..... this is a huge stretch. I'm not a hustle culture proponent by any means (Patagonia's 'let them go surfing' seems great to me!), but "Move fast and break things" is a pragmatic mantra that speaks to the nature of enterprises in highly competitive markets. Laypeople will balk at the idea of "breaking things". But that's hubris. It takes humility to admit that the breaking things part of discovery and invention isn't isn't optional. Fast or slow, you will break things pursuing an idea unknown space. The mantra speaks to the need to adjust risk tolerances in futuristic-leaning businesses. There are other ways, of course. Bio-med breaks things in controlled trials, for example. But it's also slow as molasses. Rife with in-fighting. But to equate alpha-male captivity with futuristic pragmatism is a huge reach.
- nubianwarrior 2y agoThis thread is a hiring manager's dream; imagine identifying a candidate's emotional intelligence through their HN comments. Woof, indeed.
- boh 2y agoThe Alpha thing was always cringy. Reminded me of the way people used to take Buzzfeed quizzes that would define who they are. "It says I'm a Gryffindor because I'm brave!". Identity is a bottomless pit of manipulation and self-delusion.
- int_19h 2y agoDoes it even matter? Let's assume for the sake of argument that the "alpha myth" is actually true as it pertains to humans, and the most aggressive and dominating ones rise to the top. Now look around you. Who are those people at the top of your society who unironically refer to themselves as "alphas" and embrace all the rhetoric around that, and what kind of world do they create around them?
- ashoeafoot 2y agoPostmodernism says there is no truth, only power and discussion airsuperiority derived from that. Thus alpha is a thing, reality be dammed .