Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Sussex, UK
    Posts
    1,710
    Thanked: 234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by icedog View Post
    Do you think your critters care about you or are you just the supplier of food and shelter?
    I strongly recommend you look up Harlow and Harlows experiments with Monkies on attachment.

    Here you go, the surrogate mother experiment.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Harlow

  2. #12
    Senior Member fpessanha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Coimbra, Portugal
    Posts
    751
    Thanked: 134

    Default

    Being a pet owner - a cat... a neutered one - I am strongly convinced that there is much more, in our pet's brains, than we give them credit for. Of course, we do tend to "humanize" them, meaning, atribute them emotions that are completely human.

    Lets assume that we, humans, are more developed than other animals. This concerns our brain power only. We are weak and fragile and if it weren't for our complex brains we would not be here. We would have been evolution's little experiment gone wrong... But the fact of the matter is that our brains are considerabily larger and have more computing power than say... a penguin's brain.

    We have emotions. We feel love, affection and all sorts of other things. And these things comunicate with some things that are "older", less developed than emotions and mental elaborations. We call them instincts. But our brain power makes us create and imagine things - lots of things we consider to be natural are, in fact - and this is my opinion - constructed, built from scratch in order to explain a lot of things that go on "inside" our pretty little heads.
    One of the things we created is the concept of emotion. Love is the perfect example. I'm not saying that live doesn't exist, no. It does exist because we created love based on hormonal ****tails that are cooked in our brains...

    When we love our companions we tend to attribute them similar emotions because we need to feel reciprocity... But do our pets love us? No. They feel no such thing as love. Because love is a concept created by our very own, very unique brain power. Our pets haven't the capacity - because they have no language (and thought happens through language) - to conceive concepts as complex as love or afection. They are ruled by other things. Instincts, for instance. They fear and they connect to those that are good to them, meaning, do not represent danger and cause no fear. The result is our interpretation as affection, as love because we created the mental structures to interpret them as such... because we too are animals and function is the same way but disguise and despise our instincts because we value our brain power and what we can acheive through that brain power, being that we are so weak and fragile...

    Despite all this, I see no objection to the humanization of our pets. We live together and have do so since the dawn of memory. Why not, if it helps us to connect with these little friends that protect us, cuddle with us, and make us feel good about ourselves? But we must always keep in mind 2 things: 1) we, humans, are not superior... we are just different; 2) we have created language, the mental vocabulary that alows us to structure and conceive concepts that are not transversal to all creatures because of point number one... Other creatures have brains as well, sure... and the basic functions (in mammals, mostly) are about the same. Do they think? Sure... they have electrical impulses as well and they function in a natural and seamless way that amazes us. Do they ration? Well... can we be sure of that "yes" or "no" we are willing to say? Language is everything. If we cannot relate to their codes of language - if and only if they exist - we are most certainly not going to assume that they do rationalize things. We just cannot be sure, I guess.

    But this is all a bit of an opinion that has not theoretical foundation. But I have discussed this with a friend of mine who is a psychologist. It was a very interesting conversation in which we concluded nothing. Nothing... other than that the whole topic is far too complex in what concerns behaviour and its interpretation, instincts, social structures and so forth.

    I advise you to watch a very beautiful, yet very lame film called "la marche de l'empereur" (I'm not sure what is the title in english). It is about the social behaviour of penguins in the antarctic. Fascinating... And rises a lot of questions concerning the emotions of animals.

    I will also add the link to a brilliant little scientific film that explains a lot and experiments with language and other mental structures...

    YouTube - Monty Python's Flying Circus - Frontiers in Medicine

  • #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    844
    Thanked: 155

    Default

    Dogs are dogs, cats are cats, horses are horses, birds are birds. They all have emotions, but they are dog, cat, horse and bird emotions respectively. They also think, anything above the level of a single cell organizem thinks to some extent, but they don't think people thoughts. Once again, they are dogs, cats, horses etc, not people. Once you understand this, you can begin to understand animal behaviour; until you understand this, you will always get it wrong.

  • #14
    Senior Member dward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Germantown, MD
    Posts
    1,686
    Thanked: 245

    Default

    I concur. Many people try not to hurt the feelings of a dog. However, you don't have to hurt their feelings when you establish boundries and limitations. Dogs are pack animals, period. The pack leader does not ask fellow dogs if they want to move to another spot, take a rest time, or seek a democratic vote on anything. They just do and the rest follow. I love dogs, and miss mine terribly (my ex has her). But my dog was happy because she knew I was the pack leader and enjoyed her place within our pack. She was in a loving environment and her needs (as a dog) were met.

  • #15
    ---
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,230
    Thanked: 278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fccexpert View Post
    Once again, they are dogs, cats, horses etc, not people. Once you understand this, you can begin to understand animal behaviour; until you understand this, you will always get it wrong.
    BUT... You also need to understand that domesticated dogs:
    A) Never mature emotionally beyond puppy stage. They can think of their owners as replacement parents.
    B) They treat the family that owns them as their pack.

    For these reasons, although they may not think of themselves as humans, they may view us as dogs. Or at least they feel they are the same as us in many ways.

    Cats on the other hand aren't quite so daft, which is why they sometimes don't make such good pets as dogs do. The cat I have now is a good 'un, he does act like a dog in some ways, and he is always happy to see me even when he isn't after anything.

  • #16
    Senior Member blabbermouth ChrisL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    4,445
    Thanked: 834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dward View Post
    I concur. Many people try not to hurt the feelings of a dog. However, you don't have to hurt their feelings when you establish boundries and limitations. Dogs are pack animals, period. The pack leader does not ask fellow dogs if they want to move to another spot, take a rest time, or seek a democratic vote on anything. They just do and the rest follow. I love dogs, and miss mine terribly (my ex has her). But my dog was happy because she knew I was the pack leader and enjoyed her place within our pack. She was in a loving environment and her needs (as a dog) were met.
    Exactly. I've had a dog or two all of my life and I have no qualms about being top dog. The rules are very clear about that between the dog/s and I.

    My first wife was from a family that bordered on worshiping their dogs and humanized them to such a degree it was beyond bizarre. Commissioned pet oil portraits, pee pads all over the house because of pet's refusal to be house trained, eating off of their owners plates with their owners as their owners sat on the couch, on and on. When we were married, she brought home a stray male 1-2 year old completely untrained Dalmation without my consent or my input. He would vie for more space in our bed than I'd have and that dog actually believed he was the alpha male. Once when she was gone for a weekend, the dog was on our bed. I told him to get off the bed and he growled at me. I dove on him, as he growled feverishly, flipped him over on his back, pinned his front legs down while straddling him and stared at him right in the eyes about 12" from his snout for a good five minutes. He was full grown at the time probably 50-60#. He peed a little, finally yielded and looked away. Although he would test me at times in her presence, he obeyed me after that. He probably thinks he won in the end though since he stayed and I left!

    I love dogs and coudn't see not having one as a part of the family. Still I am king and top dog with them. I can't have it any other way.

    Chris L
    Last edited by ChrisL; 06-08-2009 at 07:35 PM.
    "Blues fallin' down like hail." Robert Johnson
    "Aw, Pretty Boy, can't you show me nuthin but surrender?" Patti Smith

  • #17
    I Dull Sheffields
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    S. New Jersey
    Posts
    1,235
    Thanked: 293

    Default

    I like this thread. My dog (see him in the first post of the "Show me yours - DOGS" post) was an untrained stray that was already a year old when I got him. He had no name and knew no commands, but being a street dog, it didn't take much for me to housebreak him. He gladly and quickly handed over "pack leader" status to me, and he now looks to me for approval for everything (to eat, to go outside, etc). I found it amazing that a dog who had previously been a loner for over a year was so adept at learning how to live in a house with people. But when you realize that the "pack" instinct is ingrained on their DNA, it makes sense.

    If you treat your dog like a human, then he/she will take over the household. This does not mean you can't treat your dog with human affection -- it just means that within the boundaries of "doghood", giving your dog what he/she needs is more important: leadership, balance, routine, and the ability to roam (take long walks). Once you establish that, dogs respond to human affection the way we love them to: excitement and loyalty. I will always have dogs in my house for as long as I can handle them.

  • The Following User Says Thank You to Oglethorpe For This Useful Post:

    joesixpack (06-09-2009)

  • #18
    < Banned User >
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Newtown, CT
    Posts
    2,153
    Thanked: 586

    Default

    I believe my dog, I guess even the cat to some degree have decided that it is okay that I am the boss. The dog exhibits what I can only interpret as trust. I leave him in the car with the widows all the way down, sometimes for hours at a time, sometimes with groceries (including meat) and when I return, he is always there and so is the meat. When I leave him, he has no way of knowing I will ever return but he stays and waits patirently. He is usually asleep when I return so he must be pretty comfortable being alone. It must be faith in me.

  • #19
    Beard growth challenged
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    1,928
    Thanked: 402

    Default

    Mabe its with dogs as it is with most humans.
    They better like to follow than to carry all the responsibility of making decisions.

  • #20
    Troublemaker
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Modena, Italy
    Posts
    901
    Thanked: 271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 0livia View Post
    Mabe its with dogs as it is with most humans.
    They better like to follow than to carry all the responsibility of making decisions.
    Maybe you're being too hard on the both the dogs and the humans. It's a group survival strategy. We both have a better chance of survival in a group and, in a group, you need one individual to decide and the others to follow. Having everyone make their own decisions which way to go is not the best survival strategy when there's danger. For example, when one of us starts to run, our dog runs, assuming there's danger.

  • Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •