What we could call "alpha male theory" is pseudoscience, but also pseudohistory. The idea's always that a glorious alpha past has fallen.
-
-
Replying to @ContraPoints
I sort of agree with you. I think they're gross generalisations of personality types, but not devoid of any meaning.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @datnofact @ContraPoints
On the other hand, look at people in leadership positions, CEOs, etc, and what personality traits tend to dominate.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @datnofact
yeah but traits like confidence, ambition, a certain ruthlessness are not the half of what "alpha" is supposed to mean.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ContraPoints
Well it depends what we mean by alpha. Behavioural traits or personality traits. Most people categorise those into the latter.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @datnofact @ContraPoints
alpha/beta behaviour is clearly apparent in nature. In humans, society has eroded a lot of these behaviours.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @datnofact
In ethology, "alpha" is used to describe rank, not necessarily behavior. And the "alpha/beta" description of wolves is debunked..
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ContraPoints
Ah, I see. No alpha wolves? Didn't know that. Yeah, society isn't really structured that way. Not in any major way, anyway.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @datnofact @ContraPoints
I think some people are natural leaders and others not, and you see that in work environments, but not day-to-day.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
like you can use "Alpha" to describe whoever is at the top of hierarchies, but that's not really the manosphere usage.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Business email: info@contrapoints.com