is this true? AFAIK, many birds are solitary creatures (apart from mating). also, a large % of them mate for life, which means no quarelling for alpha male status and the corresponding male dominance hierarchies. i will have to consult my attenborough, but my tentative initial response is that the above is incorrect (at least in the broad sense of 'hierarchy').
> What makes you think that proto-humans did not? Lack of
> evidence (which is understandable since these groups were non-literate) is
> not the evidence to the contrary.
doesn't this reasoning hold [and perhaps more so, depending on the burden of proof] for the contrary position? or is there a 'just so' argument that works backwards from the surviving societies of today?
--ravi