are dogs our property or are they our responsibility?

Slavenka has posted a link to a most interesting article. Research scientists have trained dogs to stand motionless in a brain imaging scanner, the first time canine volunteer subjects have been used in this way. (The dogs are free to walk away from the scanner if they wish.)

And the results will be no surprise to dog owners. Dogs' brain activity shows they have many of the same reactions and emotions as we do.

The article raises the question of what this means for ethical treatment of our dogs. They are considered 'property' in most countries. (In fact I don't know any places where this is not the case.)

But if they feel and think in a similar way to a young human, don't they deserve the protection we extend to our own species?

It's a good read and I recommend it to all.

dogs, humans and emotions

I know that Penny can have different moods.

According to Professor Mark Bekoff, formerly of the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Colorado in Boulder, most people agree that dogs experience emotion. He says:

I often begin my lectures with the question: “Is there anyone in this audience who thinks that dogs don’t have feelings—that they don’t experience joy and sadness?” I’ve never had an enthusiastic response to this question, even in scientific gatherings, although on occasion a hand or two goes up slowly, usually halfway, as the person glances around to see if anyone is watching. But if I ask, “How many of you believe that dogs have feelings?” then almost every hand waves wildly and people smile and nod in vigorous agreement.

Here are a few pictures of times when I felt sure I knew what Penny was feeling:

FEELING SICK AND UNHAPPY




ANNOYED THAT A STRANGE DOG WAS IN OUR HOUSE. (SHE HAD MOVED INTO THE BOX I'D PREPARED FOR HIM AND WASN'T BUDGING)


HAPPY


ENGROSSED IN FOLLOWING A SCENT


CONFUSED ABOUT HER UNMANAGEABLE LEG, SORE AND UNHAPPY


I came across an article on the Animals Australia page by Professor Bekoff and found it interesting. I thought I would quote a few parts of the article:

In scientific research there are always surprises. Just when we think we’ve seen it all, new scientific data appear that force us to rethink what we know and to revise our stereotypes. For example, spindle cells, which were long thought to exist only in humans and other great apes, have recently been discovered in humpback whales, fin whales, killer whales and sperm whales in the same area of their brains as spindle cells in human brains. This brain region is linked with social organization, empathy and intuition about the feelings of others, as well as rapid gut reactions. Spindle cells are important in processing emotions. It’s likely that if we seek the presence of spindle cells in other animals we will find them.

When I first began my studies centering on the question, “What does it feel like to be a dog or a wolf?” researchers were almost all skeptics who spent their time wondering if dogs, cats, chimpanzees and other animals felt anything. Since feelings don’t fit under a microscope, these scientists usually didn’t find any—and as I like to say, I’m glad I wasn’t their dog! ...

Part of the challenge in understanding the behavior of a species is that they look like us for a reason. That’s not projecting human values. That’s primatizing the generalities that we share with them.” [Quote from Professor Robert Sapolsky, a world-renowned ethologist and neuroscientist and author of A Primate’s Memoir] No matter what we call it, researchers agree that animals and humans share many traits, including emotions. Thus, we’re not inserting something human into animals, but we’re identifying commonalities and then using human language to communicate what we observe. Being anthropomorphic is doing what’s natural and necessary to understand animal emotions...

What we have since learned about animal emotions and empathy fits in well with what we know about the lifestyle of different species—how complex their social interactions and social networks are. Emotions, empathy, and knowing right from wrong are keys to survival, without which animals—both human and nonhuman—would perish. That’s how important they are. The borders between “them” (animals) and “us” are murky and permeable.

Professor Bekoff was speaking in relation to the use of animals in science, but I think his words have an important truth for us as dog owners. I'll finish with one last quote:

Our relationship with other animals is a complex, ambiguous, challenging and frustrating affair, and we must continually reassess how we should interact with our nonhuman kin.

MARC BEKOFF has published a book called The Emotional Lives of Animals: A Leading Scientist Explores Animal Joy, Sorrow, and Empathy—and Why They Matter (New World Library, California, 2007).

dogs can read our faces

I'm watching a BBC show called 'The Secret Life of Dogs'. One of the fascinating parts is about the theory that dogs have developed the ability to read the emotions shown in the human face. In experiments, dogs were looking left, at the right side of a human face shown on a screen.

I didn't know that we don't show our emotions symmetrically - apparently the left and right side of our faces take different positions. When we look at another person we tend to look to our left, at the right side of that person's face. And dogs do the same thing, even though they don't look towards the right side of another dog's face when they meet it. In other words, dogs have developed the ability to read our faces, as they have evolved with us. Here's a clip of that part of the show. I felt a little disturbed by the apparatus on the muzzle and head of the dog in study at the University of Lincoln, but the dog did appear quite happy and wasn't restrained, so I guess it was used to the apparatus. The part about facial recognition starts at the 4:46 mark on the clip.

At this site you can see a list of the different 'chapters' of the programme, but there are only two clips - and they won't work for me here in Australia.

medications to change dog behaviours

As I was reading an article on "Pill-Popping Pets" in the New York Times, I could hear Penny making a quiet repetitive noise; she was licking her paw. The report I was reading was by James Vlahos and I'd found it by following a link from Bark Blog. I settled down to read the story and Penny settled down to turn her paws a reddish-brown colour.

The article discusses the modern trend towards medicating pets with pills originally designed to alter human emotional states.

For many years scientists have argued that animals do not have minds similar to our own. Charles Darwin believed animal minds differ from human ones in the degree of thought or emotion, not in whether they are capable of such characteristics, but his view has not been as influential as Descartes' teaching that animals are soulless machines. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy gives an overview of such views:

The early history of western philosophy reflects a tendency to see animals as lacking rationality. Aristotle defined “human” as “the rational animal”, thus rejecting the possibility that any other species is rational (Aristotle Metaphysics). Aquinas believed that animals are irrational because they are not free (Aquinas Summa Theologica). Centuries later Descartes defended a distinction between humans and animals based on the belief that language is a necessary condition for mind; on his view animals are soulless machines (Descartes Discourse on the Method). Locke agreed that animals cannot think, because words are necessary for comprehending universals (Locke Essay Concerning Human Understanding). Following in this tradition, Kant concludes that since they cannot think about themselves, animals are not rational agents and hence have only instrumental value (Kant Lectures on Ethics)

However, modern pharmaceutical companies have discovered a huge potential market for their products - pets and domesticated animals. Pragmatism may lead to a different popular belief system about animal cognition. This change runs alongside a scientific community that is more willing to investigate the possibility that we have misinterpreted or underestimated the possibilities inherent in the animals that co-exist with us on this planet. For instance, Vlahos interviewed a behavioural pharmacologist, Dr Nicholas Dodma, a pioneer in this field who founded the Tufts University Animal Behavior Clinic.Dodman gives the example of 'a pacing, hyperventilating dog.' Sceptics would question whether the animal was actually feeling anxious. Dodman said, “We’ll give him an antianxiety drug and see what happens.”

Trials of many drugs used on humans have in fact had a similar effect on dogs, the article says. Well, I can't say that surprises me, given that we usually try out our new drugs on laboratory animals. Why would we trial drugs on animals if we don't think they are like us?

It was when I got to page 5 and the discussion of dogs that are literally bored out of their brains by the life we expect them to live in our homes that I began to feel the stirrings of guilt. What was I doing sitting there reading while Penny lay in the kitchen licking her paws? I leapt up and grabbed a pair of rubber balls and ostentatiously rattled the back door. Sure enough, there she was, wet paws and all, standing by my side. Out we went and threw the ball around for ten minutes. But human frailty crept in - after all, it was only 5° outside (Celcius) and the sun was setting.

Inside again, I started to read. The discussion dealt with the question of whether pharmaceuticals have a part to play. In general, they probably do, in extreme cases; but they'll only have maximum effect if the humans are willing to put in the 'hard yards' at working with their pets to change behaviours.

Uh, oh... guilt struck again. Was Penny lying there bored? Hmmm...maybe for dinner tonight I'd give her a Kong stuffed with soft food instead of her normal hunk of rabbit or piece of meaty chicken carcass.

It took her nearly an hour to lick out the two Kongs of food. Good. But wait a minute...aren't I committed to a raw meaty diet?

It sure is a complicated life living with a dog. I think I'll stop worrying about all this and accept that Penny has a rich life. I don't think we'll be taking mood-altering drugs in the near future.

Well, she won't. Don't know about me.

For an informed evaluation of the article you might like to read the post on it by a US vet who blogs as Dolittler.