Sharing my wealth-building journey with complete transparency. Sharing the wins, mistakes, and lessons as they happen. No fake gurus. Not financial advice.
The question isn’t whether genetics influence aggression. The real question is why those genes survived evolution in the first place.
Evolution doesn’t reward traits because they’re moral. It rewards traits because they increase the chances of survival and reproduction. If aggression has persisted for hundreds of thousands of years, then at some point it must have offered an advantage.
So what were those pressures? Scarcity? War? Competition for resources? Protection of family? Different environments? Different ways of life?
Every genetic trait has a history. Intelligence, empathy, height, skin colour, disease resistance, and perhaps even aggression weren’t randomly distributed. They were shaped by the environments our ancestors lived in.
The deeper question isn’t whether genes matter. It’s what forces shaped those genes, and what that tells us about human evolution. Understanding why is far more interesting than arguing about whether.
This keeps the discussion philosophical and focused on evolutionary theory without making unsupported claims about any modern population or race.
@elonmusk@JackPosobiec The real question isn’t whether aggression is genetic. It’s why evolution preserved it in some populations. What survival advantage did it provide?
What survival pressures shaped those differences?