Well, for the sake of argument - "Nature" can still be FAR outweighed by social constructs.   Easy example - biological "investment" in reproduction.   If you start with an assumption that the greatest biological urge is to pass your genes on to the next generation, then women are at an immediate disadvantage since their reproductive "investment" is far higher.  (i.e. a female can only get pregnant from one male at one time every 9 months.   Whereas a male can pass on genes multiple times to multiple partners).     So are men genetically predisposed to have multiple partners and kill other males?     Perhaps so.    Yet, monogamous marriage is still prevalent as a goal and social norm in our society.   And male/female population ratios are still roughly equal.

The whole basis of this article is a faulty conclusion that the "Google Manifesto" is "science" and proven.     No, it's not.    True science would account for every factor, not just pick and choose the ones that fit a narrative.