Josh Richards

That was weird. Anyways, you think an "alpha" in a wolf pack means the strongest mentally? And not the one who physically bests the rest of them?
That would appear to be a widely, socially accepted approach to the term, one that encompasses social and relational, as opposed to simply physical, dominance.
 
Wrong. The widely accepted approach to the term IS physical dominance. The terms of course originated from the Greek alphabet, but were later used in zoology to label the dynamics in the animal kingdom. People have recently started to use the term to label someone who exudes confidence. Which is just silly, because more times than not, the loudest/proudest person in a room is actually one of the weakest.
That would appear to be a widely, socially accepted approach to the term, one that encompasses social and relational, as opposed to simply physical, dominance.
 
Wrong. The widely accepted approach to the term IS physical dominance. The terms of course originated from the Greek alphabet, but were later used in zoology to label the dynamics in the animal kingdom. People have recently started to use the term to label someone who exudes confidence. Which is just silly, because more times than not, the loudest/proudest person in a room is actually one of the weakest.

Cool. So you are aware that there is a competing yet widely circulating approach to the term.
 
That was weird. Anyways, you think an "alpha" in a wolf pack means the strongest mentally? And not the one who physically bests the rest of them?
In wolves, sure. But since we're talking about humans, no. For me and I'm sure many others, "alpha" has more to do with attitude, confidence, etc. It's fine if that's not your criteria, but not everyone goes solely by physicality and/or muscles.