Humans are weird. We are the only large animal to ever truly dominate this planet, and it isn't because we have the sharpest teeth or the fastest legs. It's because we’re "eusocial." Or at least, that’s what the legendary biologist Edward O. Wilson argued in his 2012 book, The Social Conquest of Earth.
Wilson was a giant in the field. He spent his life looking at ants, but he ended it by looking at us. He wanted to know why humans, out of the millions of species that have existed, managed to build cities, write symphonies, and launch rockets. Most people think it was just "intelligence." Wilson thought that was a lazy answer. He believed the real secret was a specific, rare type of social organization that we share with only a tiny handful of other creatures, like bees and termites.
The Fight Over Where We Came From
For decades, the standard view in biology was "inclusive fitness." You probably know it as kin selection. It’s the idea that you’re more likely to help people who share your genes. If I die to save my brother, my genes still sort of win. This was the gospel of evolutionary biology, championed by people like Richard Dawkins.
Then Wilson dropped a bomb.
In The Social Conquest of Earth, he basically said the math for kin selection doesn't actually work. He pivoted toward something called "group selection" or multi-level selection. This wasn't just a minor academic spat; it was a full-blown civil war in the scientific community. Over 140 scientists, including heavy hitters like Steven Pinker, signed a letter essentially telling Wilson he was wrong.
Why does this matter to you? Because it changes how we view human nature. If kin selection is everything, we are fundamentally selfish, only looking out for our "tribes" or families. But if group selection is real, then "altruism" is baked into our DNA. We evolved to be team players because groups of cooperators always beat groups of selfish individuals.
Why Eusociality is the Key
Eusociality is a fancy term for "true sociality." To be eusocial, a species needs three things:
- Multiple generations living together.
- Cooperative care of the young.
- A division of labor.
Until humans showed up, this was a club reserved for insects. There are over 2,600 families of insects, but only about 15 have evolved eusociality. Yet, those few species—the ants, bees, and termites—make up more than half the biomass of all insects on Earth. They won. They conquered their world just like we conquered ours.
📖 Related: Is there actually a legal age to stay home alone? What parents need to know
Wilson argues that humans hit a "biological jackpot." We didn't just get smart; we got social in a way that allowed us to build permanent "nests" (campsites) and protect them. Once we started sitting around fires and sharing food, the selection pressure shifted. It wasn't just about the strongest individual anymore. It was about which group could coordinate the best hunt or the best defense.
The Two-Faced Nature of Humanity
This is where the social conquest of earth gets messy. Wilson’s most famous takeaway is that humans are permanently conflicted. We are torn between two different levels of evolution.
On one hand, there is individual selection. This drives us to be selfish, to compete for status, and to look out for number one. It’s the "sinful" side of our nature, if you want to use religious terms. On the other hand, there is group selection. This drives us to be heroic, selfless, and cooperative. It’s the "virtuous" side.
Wilson famously wrote that individual selection promotes sin, while group selection promotes virtue. We are stuck in the middle. Forever.
This isn't a bug; it's a feature. If we were purely group-oriented, we’d be like ants—mindless drones with no individuality. If we were purely individualistic, we’d be like sharks—incapable of building a civilization. The tension between the two is what makes us human. It's why we have politics. It's why we have internal moral dilemmas. It's why every movie ever made is about a hero choosing between their own safety and the good of the team.
The Myth of the "Great Leap Forward"
A lot of textbooks talk about a "Great Leap Forward" 50,000 years ago where a single mutation made us smart. Wilson hates this idea. He thinks the social conquest of earth was a much slower, more grueling process.
It started with the "pre-adaptations."
👉 See also: The Long Haired Russian Cat Explained: Why the Siberian is Basically a Living Legend
- Bipedalism: Walking on two legs freed up our hands.
- Diet: Eating meat gave us the calories to grow big, expensive brains.
- Fire: Cooking food meant we spent less time chewing and more time talking.
But the real turning point was the "fortress." For ants, it’s the mound. For humans, it was the campsite. When our ancestors started staying in one place to guard a fire and a stash of food, they had to cooperate. You can't leave the fire unattended. Someone has to watch the kids while others hunt. This created a selection pressure for social intelligence. We didn't get smart to solve math problems; we got smart to keep track of who was lying, who was sharing, and who was pulling their weight in the group.
Why Biology Explains Our Modern Mess
Think about your social media feed. It’s a disaster zone of tribalism, "us vs. them" rhetoric, and performative outrage. Wilson saw this coming.
The same mechanisms that allowed the social conquest of earth—our intense loyalty to our group—are the same mechanisms that fuel racism and war. We are hardwired to form groups. We are hardwired to compete with other groups. In the prehistoric past, being part of a group was a death sentence. If your tribe kicked you out, you died. If another tribe took your territory, you died.
So, we evolved "tribalistic" brains. We get a hit of dopamine when we see our "team" win, whether that's a sports team, a political party, or a religious sect. Wilson’s work suggests that we can't just "educate" ourselves out of tribalism. It's not a lack of information; it's a biological drive.
However, he wasn't a nihilist. He believed that by understanding these biological roots, we could learn to manage them. We can't change our DNA, but we can change what we define as our "group." We can choose to see "humanity" or "the planet" as our tribe rather than just our local zip code.
The Problem With Modernity
We are living in a world our biology doesn't recognize. Evolution happens over hundreds of thousands of years. Technology happens over decades.
We evolved to live in groups of about 150 people (Dunbar’s number). Now, we live in digital villages of millions. Our brains are constantly triggered by "threats" from people we will never meet, halfway across the world. This creates a state of chronic stress. We are trying to use a brain designed for the social conquest of earth to navigate a world of algorithmic manipulation and global pandemics.
✨ Don't miss: Why Every Mom and Daughter Photo You Take Actually Matters
Wilson’s critique of modern life was that we are "paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and godlike technology." It’s a dangerous mix. We have the power to destroy the planet, but we still have the urges of an ape trying to protect a campfire.
Putting Wilson's Theories into Practice
So, what do we do with this? If Wilson is right, then the way we structure our companies, our schools, and our lives is often fundamentally at odds with our nature.
If you want a team to work well, you can't just give them individual bonuses. That triggers individual selection (selfishness). You have to create a shared "nest"—a common goal or identity that triggers group selection (cooperation).
- Emphasize Shared Identity: Stop focusing on individual metrics and start focusing on the "tribe's" success.
- The Power of Proximity: Physical presence matters. Our brains evolved to trust people we see and share food with. Zoom calls don't trigger the same "eusocial" bonding that a shared meal does.
- Acknowledge the Conflict: Don't be surprised when you feel selfish. It's literally your biology. When you feel that tug to put yourself first, realize it’s just one half of your evolutionary history talking. The other half—the part that wants to help—is just as real.
Wilson’s work isn't just about ants or fossils. It’s a mirror. It shows us that we aren't "above" nature. We are a part of it. We won the Earth because we learned how to be together. If we want to keep it, we have to remember how that works.
The social conquest of earth was achieved through a delicate balance of competing interests. We are the most successful species because we are the most complicated. We are saints and we are sinners, often in the same hour. Wilson’s legacy is giving us a map of that internal battlefield.
To apply these insights today, look at the groups you belong to. Are they built on a "shared nest" philosophy, or are they just a collection of individuals fighting for scraps? To thrive in a post-Wilson world, we have to deliberately lean into the group-selection side of our nature. We need to build institutions that reward cooperation rather than just competition. The future of our species likely depends on whether we can manage our tribalistic urges while harnessing our eusocial strengths.
Next Steps for Deepening Your Understanding:
- Read the Source: Pick up a copy of The Social Conquest of Earth. It’s dense, but Wilson’s prose is surprisingly accessible for a scientist.
- Audit Your Groups: Look at your workplace or social circles. Identify the "division of labor" and "cooperative care" structures. If they aren't there, that's why the group feels fractured.
- Study the Critics: Look up Richard Dawkins’ review of Wilson’s book. Understanding the "Inclusive Fitness" vs. "Group Selection" debate will give you a much clearer picture of why this is still the biggest fight in biology.
- Observe Nature: Spend ten minutes watching an ant colony. You’ll see the exact division of labor and selfless behavior Wilson describes. Then, look at a human city. The parallels are more than just a metaphor.