If there is someone who expects his cat to be capable of all those things, without fail, then quite obviously he is the absurd one. No wonder his cat has dismissed him as a gone case. Given up on him. Completely hopeless.The thesis that there could be a genuine friendship between humans and animals is absurd. Every animal lacks the intellectual possibility to really know and understand a human being. It does not know his thoughts, even if he expresses them, it does not know his past deeds and it has no idea of moral and ethics, which are all prerequisites for the formation of genuine friendship.
A lot of people looking at this would be tempted to anthropomorphise it. It's smiling and happy! Except it's not - that's an axolotl's normal expression. As Millennium says, one should not be tempted to do that with dogs or cats.
As I said in an earlier reply, animals are not humans but humans are animals.
And by that I mean that humans share some basic instincts and feelings with animals, but of course one should not go the other way around and think that animals are just like humans, you would do the animal a disservice by not considering its natural behavior.
The classic example, where you get home and the dog have unraveled the Persian carpet. Yelling, screaming, and the dog crawling into a corner with hanging ears, a typical example of bad conscience.
Except the dog doesn't understand a word, now it was just so happy to see you and you're standing there foaming at the mouth.
It is beyond the dog’s ability to connect ruined carpet, angry owner.
And that's where many people are wrong when they treat their animals like furry babies. And they even think they are kind to their animals.
My avatar is a portrait of King Athelstan.Good to see you again. That’s actually very good to hear from you.
Yes over the past few generations & centuries people have increasingly discovered just how similar humans are to animals in all areas; genetically, anatomically, neurologically & psychologically.
All vertebrates are said to share the same basic overall neurological anatomy, & thus emotions & psychology as you said, but various species have built on top of that over their evolution in certain ways, noticeably, along with increased size in certain brain areas, in sociality, which appears to be, like diet, something that comes & goes across species, which appears to have a significant impact on intelligence. This is certainly a major theory for the evolution of human cognition. & is also why distantly related species like dogs & horses have bonded with us than closer related species, like the several solitary primate species there are. Aren’t orangutans solitary? They may just be our closest related non-social species.
Now what you said, along with revealing our similarities & relatedness, is certainly now sufficient to justify not abusing & exploiting animals. But is it also enough to argue that animals can not just be our companions, but also our true friends as well as community mates? Remember what I said about true friends & community linking together above & other than an emotional base but also a moral one? That people who even dislike each other may still be able to be considered friends if they share those qualities which I mentioned earlier? Cuz remember that an emotional base alone isn’t sufficient for healthy relationships. Minimal morality & respect is needed as well. Fetishes often form that way. Slavery is a common historical example of what happens when people form friendships & community while lacking morality; sure even in the most benign & benevolent scenarios the slaves & oppressed were considered just as heartily part of the society & community as the free & superior people were, but the slaves’ & oppressed internal needs & interests were certainly not taken into account by the superiors. Was that a matter of emotion & cognitive sophistication, or more that of morality & justice? Isn’t there an eerie similar tendency for human captivity of animals? Just how often do people genuinely care internally, meaning whether the other person is happy in their own way & definition, for the animals they are responsible for? For those who often say their dogs, horses & cattle animals were meant to do their jobs, like have you ever seeked to ask them about them in ways that they could comprehend? If you allowed your beast of burden to stop working for a while & it didn’t continue, wouldn’t that be sufficient to consider them not desiring that?
Remember that true friends, along with appreciating each other’s company, genuinely want each other to be happy & content & what’s best for each other on the inside.
The answer to this of course takes into account many factors, like cognitive sophistication as well as interpretations of what true & ideal friendship & community means.
That being said, I think it’s often evident & sufficient to conclude that the dogs & other animals who show affection for us genuinely want us to be happy as well as what’s best for us, even if it’s in ways that’s limited to their own cognitive sophistication.
Btw I wonder who that royal fellow on your avatar is?
|Similar History Discussions||History Forum||Date|
|Domesticated animals||General History|
|How to find Reconstructions and other information about ancient domesticated animals?||General History|
|Animals of the eastern Great Plains, circa 1880s.||North American History|
|Do you think that this "Dog Shogun" 's laws for the protection of animals utterly stupid or ill-considered ?||Asian History|