Evolutionary theories offer an extremely powerful lens to view things in. Great insights can be drawn from thinking with evolutionary narratives, which can be applied beyond the field of pure biology, into sociology, economics, and more. It really seems that this lens can be applied universally, to anything that relates to people or animals, since we are all products of evolution.

For example, why are great leaders almost always charismatic, and don’t use force to get group compliance? Evolutionary theory tells us that pure power does not make for a good leader. Groups led by tyrannical leaders, who use force to keep the members in line, are generally not stable. A few unhappy subordinates of the group may gang up and remove the leader, who despite being the strongest one within the group, is still no match for several weaker members. So for great leaders who are able to form and maintain stable groups for long periods of time, charisma wins over force.

But very often, the evolutionary line of thinking baits us into conclusions that appear logically correct, but are actually false, post-hoc rationalizations. Following the above example, we can find other, equally plausible sounding explanations for why great leaders are not tyrannical, based on what we think the answer should be, then spin it with an evolutionary theory style narrative. It will sound very credible, despite the fact that it is not based on reliable evidence.

I’ve found that we tend to find things that have an evolutionary theory based justification more easily believable, even if we are normally skeptical about other things. As a result, evolutionary theories are often used as very effective smoke screens for artificially crafted narratives to hide behind. So although evolutionary theory has a broad range of applicability, we must be vigilant whenever it is used, and examine the evidence thoroughly to make sure that the claims are backed up.