Comment

Comment by jrmg

It seems clear in all your replies here that you see ‘alpha’ as a synonym for ‘leader’, and as a somewhat relative term (like, my boss is an alpha to me, and a beta to their boss). Given your definition, of course it’s obvious that it apples to many facets of human society. Leaders and followers are all around us.

But in popular discourse there’s also a sense of ‘alphas’ getting into their position by violence or assholery that I think your definition is missing.

Even in scientific discourse, there is the idea that ‘alphas’ must gain their position by dominance - not by other methods (prestige, age, etc).

People use words in different ways, so in a way your definition is as good as any other, but (as with anything language related) you can’t really insist on it if others think it means something different and you want to have reasonable conversations with them (ironically, insisting on your definition seems like an attempt to assert dominance).

Edit: removed some snark, sorry. But I’ll also add: the article uses the scientific usage I mentioned above: wild real wolf pack ‘leaders’ aren’t ‘alphas’ because they don’t maintain their position by dominating the other wolves.

parent jrmg 1 year ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton