Who here is an alpha male?

So in this instance, I’m not wrong…

…good attributes to possess, and still you’re bored? Our human ingenuity usually solves such things… for the sake of our sanity, so I have every faith in you that you will do so. ; )

Seems like all you need to do to be alpha male is say you’re one, it looks like… :laughing:

…and now this thread has become a lot more interesting. :smiley:

The floor has been reopened up for discussion.

There is no discussion with this guy.

I found this out the hard way. He is unable to tell whenever somebody is thinking beyond him, “therefore nobody is able to think beyond him”. Therefore he is at the top…

He’s just old and lost the ability to revise his beliefs, you can’t blame him - it’s natural. In the meantime, the floor has shifted from under his feet and he doesn’t even realise it.

Certainly boredom isn’t any kind of freedom.
Its the absence of purpose, which means the lack of power to set goals.

When you do I recommend red wine with it.

…remember, were always wrong… in his eyes, and so… he’s already won, before we even begin.

…but remember, you’re wrong.

I hope to bear that in mind…

Lock, Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels is really good too. Same director, a lot of the same cast members.

…a very alpha male film, but I’ll watch anything with Jason Statham in it, because the big guy can act… some of his roles have been blinding.

If there is such a thing as an alpha male in human terms then it can not be so easily related to any other species. Humans are just that complex. We generally travel in more than one social circle and for this reason a man might be an alpha in one circle and not another. So no, you can not have a true alpha male in human terms. Therefore nobody here is an alpha male.

Given that we are usually involved in more than one social circle, it is also true to say that we are not pack animals. It might have been more correct and applicable in centuries past to apply alpha terminology to humans(although still very doubtful) but I would think that if evolution is fact then we have not been able to apply alpha status since the last stage or jump in evolution. One benefits from attempting a logical look at this very topic and applying some deeper thought.

It is worth pointing out however that women do tend to have preferences when it comes to males that include height and deep voices among other things and again I am speaking generally - this is like due to biological imperatives - however - the same can be said of men having preferences involving women and it is here that things get very complicated because what seems good to one individual can seem disastrous to another individual. If alpha males exist then it is also possible that the attributes that make up a definition of an alpha male change with time due to the fact that the structure of society changes with time.

It may be truer to say that humans are the alpha species even though humans are probably the only species that would waste their time on such debate for possibly millennia.

:smiley:

And so concludes my rant and two cents worth . . .

let me add my particular view/spin on this topic.

In addition to the variability of belong- ing to certain groups, added dimensions can be particularized by the common understanding of the way wearing different hats has come to be understood in terms of limits to perceive the preception of inauthentic existence. To the more liberal experience, based on praxis rather then on practice, such limits may not be properly understood.

The political right may support the prior rather then the later point of view, reducing the problem three fold into preceptions~perceptions of a more significant approach below any arising arguments surrounding an anomoulus theory within the argument.

In fact , the liberal point of view is basically contradictory in essence, in that interpretation , because it legitemizes a de-differentiation of cognitive clarity for the sake of more general understood perception, based on more basic levels of understanding.
There is a problem with such understanding, most of which revolve around precieved assumptions which have no credible basis, as on such which relate to various levels of economic tie-ins.

However, such assumptions , candy wrapped by sophistry, have to be modified by the most finely calibrated methods, to coincide with the political reality of various affiliations based on simplified levels
social reality.

De-marginalizing social reality too brusqually may create an effect similar to a diver emerging from a depth not appreciated. It will come back with a vengeance. The alpha male will be resented with the same force that necessity of submerging in the first place.

The absolute corruption of power may only be held credible until it becomes obvious that the emperor really is wearing scanty or clothes , if that.

Then the bottom line is the morphing of the hero, to that of the antihero.

The idea that short term gains are worth such longer term reversals, then may be seen as an opportunity to gain time and needing a submerged hat , that is hoped to be forgotten.

And what of the man who is an alpha in more than one circle - perhaps in very many circles? Do they not exist? Is it possible to be alpha in all social circles??

I thought about posting the same exact thing, but was otherwise distracted - glad someone else noticed it

Hello Meno_, I have spent some time thinking about what you have written here over the last several days. I wasn’t certain whether I should respond at first. I think the concept of the alpha male can be extended beyond a political assessment and for that reason I am offering yet another twist.

I agree that there is a lack of consistency in the feeling of belonging to any given group. We humans do tend to spread our experience out to include many unrelated events in our lives. This leaves us not genuinely belonging to a style or period. It seems to me that this is part of the more liberal experience and in turn leads to some uneasiness in our life.

Furthermore it seems that humans have collectively corrupted the idea of what it means to be free on a few if not many unrelated levels. Humans seem to be on an everlasting search to reduce things to simpler methods of reasoning which lend a hand in removing the substance of reality and how complex that reality actually is. I think it is safe to say that humans do not want to embrace complexity.

I can see the pros and cons of all this - on one hand there is a certain amount of efficiency that can be gained for the human species and on the other hand I can see how this all leads to a destruction of the mental and physical environment that can be achieved.

There is obviously potential danger holding onto preconceptions that are automatically applied to a situation. A less than optimal outcome will present itself. I do believe that the concept of the alpha male is not standardized and that the modern discourse(2000 onward) involving this concept is a gross deviation from its original intention - much like comparing apples to oranges - certainly they are both roundish on the outside but they taste completely different.

I think that most humans despite their political leaning can fall prey to a too simplistic understanding of how hierarchies work. We often forget or fail to take into consideration the importance of the person at the bottom of the hierarchy for without the one at the bottom there is simply no top.

I think that the problem of asking “Who here is an alpha male?” comes down to the fact that you are asking an individual to identify themselves as something that they may not understand completely and that others might disagree with them on. If you are asking me whether I have come across any alpha males on this forum then my answer would be no. I see a few arrogant males - I see a few clueless males - I also see a number of reasonable males - indeed I see males that fit into different categories. What I do not see on this forum is a male that is being followed by the rest of this forum.

Despite this, a characterization to base an answer on was given in the OP - therefore it would seem that this post like my first in this thread is metamorphic.

In this soft new world I see a whole bunch of males who place themselves at the top by default and don’t admit to the appreciation of the ideas of others. This is especially apparent in the keyboard warriors of the internet who never seem to band together to form a cohesive group with unified ideas.

Forgive me for saying that the current social reality seems more like white noise than anything resembling an organised reality. From the outside it is difficult to see any consistency. On the other hand who says that reality need be organised, structured and consistent to be reality.

Oh well - white noise on the surface seems consistent. Catch my drift?

Silhouette

To be fair, my post was not in-line with the original idea of this thread therefore I am limiting the way I answer you.

I don’t see anybody on ILP who the rest follow but then again we are not characterizing alpha-ness this way, are we? but instead we are doing it the following way:

Yes, I have seen a number of men on ILP like this - a number of them have posted on the same day too.
It would seem that we have more than one alpha male in the ILP group(circle).

On one hand: I suggest the man who is alpha in more than one circle is perhaps spreading himself too thin given what it would take to maintain all those many circles. I think conceptual alphas can exist in many circles but I don’t think they are in the best position to lead each circle - speaking of the optimization of each circle. Is it possible to be alpha in all social circles?? I can not see how, have you met a man that is without any doubt, in this situation?

On the other hand: Sure, based on the characterization that you originally gave, a man can be an alpha in very many circles and even all of his social circles.

i am as alpha as it gets

Let’s not do something so confused.

An alpha in any species is defined by who the rest of the species will naturally defer to. If we wanted to conceptualize what makes an alpha we would examine what superior characteristics the identified alphas have in common…
If we find universals we could say those are the traits the species looks for in their alphas.

With humans our nature is obscured by nurture… We have learned values atop intrinsic ones, the line is blurred and we can’t easily tell what’s instinct vs indoctrination.
So we have to look cross culturally to see what universals remain when we correct for culture and socialization as best as we are able.

I have only been able to find 3 very broad universals for males

  1. Power - Being a dangerous foe or rival
  2. Wisdom - Comprehending people and the world
  3. Charm - Being popular with members of the opposite sex

In that priority order… and there seems to be only one disqualifier and that’s being antisocial (tyrannical, egocentric, psychopathic etc)

That’s what we look for, mind you… so in a larger society where we don’t all intermingle, it tends to be far easier to fool us by merely “appearing” as having those traits.
But even so, it’s telling that those are the traits that are mimicked in such an attempt.

Not that I set up this thread 7-8 years ago in any serious capacity, but our lists differ in that my list was trait based. What traits (if any in particular) tend to lead to power, wisdom and charm?

And obviously my list was not a list of ideals, the intention was to stay away from what we think “ought” to result in alpha male status in favour of what actually does in practice whether we like it or not.

fuse wrote:

You sound the most closely related to an alpha male.

What traits are you identifying here?
Focusing on what you have bolded, I feel like I’m detecting (in order of appearance) apathy, independence, being discerning/discriminatory, being respectful & loyal. Overall, an attitude of conditional social strength with past experience in leadership, subsequently rejected.

Would you say these are the traits of an alpha male? Is there anything you’d add/take away?