Quote: Tracy Collins

The problem (if we can call it that) is that humans often try to project their own complexity of emotions onto animals who don't really have that capacity. Dogs simply aren't wired to feel things like embarrasment, shame, jealousy--emotions that requre a heightend ability to predict how someone else will feel--.

Our emotions are intertwined with our egos, big time, which I think is one of the primary differences between animals and people (and why I appreciate animals so much!).

Dogs lack that complex ego (which makes them superior imho) so they lack the capacity and the need to 'censor' themselves emotionally, even while they lack the ability to feel things like shame and embarrassment. It's pretty cool

I think if we were able to conceptualize what it's like to operate in a world without ego, we would have a much better understanding of where our dogs are coming from emotionally.

I also appreciate the lack of artifice that comes with animals --probably why I prefer their company to most people It's simply easier.

But I suppose that big primate brains (and their ability to devote resources to things like empathy, predicting future outcomes, self-censuring, etc.) are what allowed relatively puny and defenseless humans to create the kind of social culture that lets us dominate the planet. (The merits of that are also up for debate.) Without that brain complexity, and despite all the emotional baggage that comes with it, humans wouldn't be humans. Cogito ergo sum.

It is an excellent book.

I was raised to put human emotions onto the animals. I think my parent's used it as a teaching type technique to some degree. Once I learned differently, r/t complex emotions, I do still catch myself defaulting back to it on occas. and that really messes me up. I have to keep it black/white, either I allow the behavior or I don't.....

The best part about dogs is they aren't human. No ego, no worries, just live in the moment, how wonderful that truly is.

There was a recent study on dogs' sense of fairness. The dogs in the study watched other dogs getting treats, or more treats, or better treats, and determined it was unfair if they weren't offered the same reward. I'm not sure on the details, it was mentioned on the radio and I never looked up the full study.

Was this jealousy or fairness? Resource guarding?

I think there depths to the animal mind and emotions of which we will never be aware. Their emotions may be different, but every bit as complex as ours.

And I wouldn't say dogs live in the moment totally. For example, a dog will perform a string of OB commands in anticipation of a reward. Or, a dog will want to turn a certain way at a crossroads in order to get to a favorite wooded area, that is still two miles away. The reward (or negative) may be in the future, but the dog makes immediate decisions in the present based on that future event.

Or is it really all rote? We get a special look into animal minds with birds that can talk (african greys). These parrots demonstrate a human-like range of emotions and cognitive abilities, including strong attachement (love), memory, and language creation, along with a sense of humor.

If dogs could talk, I think their emotional life would be a whole lot more complex than depicted in the movie 'Up'. Though they got one thing right, where the dog would interupt everything to yell "squirrel!"

Yup, that's my boy.

I still think the most brilliant depiction of the internal life of a dog is Almondine in The Story of Edgar Sawtelle.

I agree. One of my all-time favorite novels. My Leo, Ellie, IS Almondine.

 Quote: kiersten lippman

There was a recent study on dogs' sense of fairness. The dogs in the study watched other dogs getting treats, or more treats, or better treats, and determined it was unfair if they weren't offered the same reward. I'm not sure on the details, it was mentioned on the radio and I never looked up the full study.

There have been quite a few similar studies going on recently (canine cognition studies are so IN right now !!) - a Harvard PHD friend of mine has been running trials with local dogs all year at her lab here in Cambridge... fun stuff.

I probably read into what I think Oscar is "feeling" WAY more than there is scientific basis for... but I tend to think there is a vast amount of emotional capacity inherent in dogs that we just don't understand, yet (the aforementioned friend who studies animal minds usually disagrees with me on this though ). And I third the praise for Temple Grandin's work... she rocks.

~Natalya

 Quote: natalya zahn

There have been quite a few similar studies going on recently (canine cognition studies are so IN right now !!)

I probably read into what I think Oscar is "feeling" WAY more than there is scientific basis for... ~Natalya

I read a short version of a fairness study, something about asking dogs to give paw and some got treat and some didn't and the ones that didn't stopped giving paw. I don't remember the details exactly but remembered thinking, how many times can a dog give paw before they just tire of it. It will be interesting as more come out....

Natalya now I'm 2nd guessing myself again!....

I don't train or work with each dog the same way, the end result may be the same but not how we got there. So is there variance in their emotion thus their response that makes one handle say a 'soft' dog different from a 'harder' dog?

Great topic and discussion.

What about the Spencer Quinn "Chet" books? I find Chet to be an honest and likely dog "voice", even more so than Almondine of Edgar Sawtelle.