22 Dec 2016, 7:02 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
The idea that animals don't feel pain the way humans do might be true with simpler forms of life, such as simpler insects, microscopic life, and such. But there is no way in hell that dogs, cats, whales, horses, and such do not. That's especially true for domesticated animals that have picked up on human emotion such as love. No one can tell me that the animals I've owned throughout my life didn't feel something for me, or that it was just my perception of wanting them to love me. Such emotions might not be as developed or complex among animals as it is among humans, but I absolutely believe it's there in some simpler form.
Agree. The only thing I'd challenge is that most if not all forms of life could feel pain. Pain provides us with an important stimulus, to avoid things that harm us. As such, it makes sense from an evolutionary perspective for it to exist in all creatures or most. I also don't like the idea that there are "lesser" forms of life (I realize this isn't what you were necessarily implying or thinking, I'm just continuing my rant
). What little I know about the biology of jelly fish, and some insects, and other flora/fauna, there are some amazing traits and behaviors out there that challenge the idea that they are "simpler" in any way. Just because we can't perceive it, doesn't mean it ain't there. I'd argue we should assume it is there unless sound data suggest otherwise (I like the ethical reasoning outlined elsewhere thats support this). And I totally agree that domesticated animals are unique, without a doubt. We've lived with them for eons, and we've selected them for specific traits, which obviously include some form of "emotional compatability" for lack of a better term. Pets have provided me with some of the greatest joys (and sorrows).
22 Dec 2016, 8:45 am
jcfay wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
The idea that animals don't feel pain the way humans do might be true with simpler forms of life, such as simpler insects, microscopic life, and such. But there is no way in hell that dogs, cats, whales, horses, and such do not. That's especially true for domesticated animals that have picked up on human emotion such as love. No one can tell me that the animals I've owned throughout my life didn't feel something for me, or that it was just my perception of wanting them to love me. Such emotions might not be as developed or complex among animals as it is among humans, but I absolutely believe it's there in some simpler form.
Agree. The only thing I'd challenge is that most if not all forms of life could feel pain. Pain provides us with an important stimulus, to avoid things that harm us. As such, it makes sense from an evolutionary perspective for it to exist in all creatures or most. I also don't like the idea that there are "lesser" forms of life (I realize this isn't what you were necessarily implying or thinking, I'm just continuing my rant
). What little I know about the biology of jelly fish, and some insects, and other flora/fauna, there are some amazing traits and behaviors out there that challenge the idea that they are "simpler" in any way. Just because we can't perceive it, doesn't mean it ain't there. I'd argue we should assume it is there unless sound data suggest otherwise (I like the ethical reasoning outlined elsewhere thats support this). And I totally agree that domesticated animals are unique, without a doubt. We've lived with them for eons, and we've selected them for specific traits, which obviously include some form of "emotional compatability" for lack of a better term. Pets have provided me with some of the greatest joys (and sorrows).
This has brought back a memory (not a good one) of 7 year old me.
I recall playing in the garden. I always had an interest in insects. Not necessarily fair to them. I used to build islands of sand for ants, surrounded by water, and watch how they reacted, for instance. I'm not proud of it, but hopefully I can use the 'I was a child, I didn't understand' defense. To a young me, it was all in the name of science as guilty as I feel about it now.
On this occasion I had a ladybird on my hand. It spread its wings slightly, but didn't fly away. I wanted a closer look at its wing so pinched it gently between my finger and thumb, at which point the ladybird made a move to fly away and its wing came off, and away it went.
10 minutes later, looking around for other insects, I found a ladybird that I assumed to be a different one. I picked it up on my index finger, and it bit me. Properly bit me. Hard.
I had never before, and have never since, been bitten by a ladybird. You can't tell me that wasn't the same ladybird, and it wasn't aware of what I'd done to it. It remembered, and it did not want to be near me again.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,488
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
22 Dec 2016, 1:43 pm
jcfay wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
The idea that animals don't feel pain the way humans do might be true with simpler forms of life, such as simpler insects, microscopic life, and such. But there is no way in hell that dogs, cats, whales, horses, and such do not. That's especially true for domesticated animals that have picked up on human emotion such as love. No one can tell me that the animals I've owned throughout my life didn't feel something for me, or that it was just my perception of wanting them to love me. Such emotions might not be as developed or complex among animals as it is among humans, but I absolutely believe it's there in some simpler form.
Agree. The only thing I'd challenge is that most if not all forms of life could feel pain. Pain provides us with an important stimulus, to avoid things that harm us. As such, it makes sense from an evolutionary perspective for it to exist in all creatures or most. I also don't like the idea that there are "lesser" forms of life (I realize this isn't what you were necessarily implying or thinking, I'm just continuing my rant
). What little I know about the biology of jelly fish, and some insects, and other flora/fauna, there are some amazing traits and behaviors out there that challenge the idea that they are "simpler" in any way. Just because we can't perceive it, doesn't mean it ain't there. I'd argue we should assume it is there unless sound data suggest otherwise (I like the ethical reasoning outlined elsewhere thats support this). And I totally agree that domesticated animals are unique, without a doubt. We've lived with them for eons, and we've selected them for specific traits, which obviously include some form of "emotional compatability" for lack of a better term. Pets have provided me with some of the greatest joys (and sorrows).
You are correct.
Sweetleaf
Veteran
Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,911
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
22 Dec 2016, 2:01 pm
jcfay wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
The idea that animals don't feel pain the way humans do might be true with simpler forms of life, such as simpler insects, microscopic life, and such. But there is no way in hell that dogs, cats, whales, horses, and such do not. That's especially true for domesticated animals that have picked up on human emotion such as love. No one can tell me that the animals I've owned throughout my life didn't feel something for me, or that it was just my perception of wanting them to love me. Such emotions might not be as developed or complex among animals as it is among humans, but I absolutely believe it's there in some simpler form.
Agree. The only thing I'd challenge is that most if not all forms of life could feel pain. Pain provides us with an important stimulus, to avoid things that harm us. As such, it makes sense from an evolutionary perspective for it to exist in all creatures or most. I also don't like the idea that there are "lesser" forms of life (I realize this isn't what you were necessarily implying or thinking, I'm just continuing my rant
). What little I know about the biology of jelly fish, and some insects, and other flora/fauna, there are some amazing traits and behaviors out there that challenge the idea that they are "simpler" in any way. Just because we can't perceive it, doesn't mean it ain't there. I'd argue we should assume it is there unless sound data suggest otherwise (I like the ethical reasoning outlined elsewhere thats support this). And I totally agree that domesticated animals are unique, without a doubt. We've lived with them for eons, and we've selected them for specific traits, which obviously include some form of "emotional compatability" for lack of a better term. Pets have provided me with some of the greatest joys (and sorrows).
Actually I'd argue cats selected people as a species they could co-exist with and benefit from, rather than humans having selected cats....granted people have certainly influenced certain breeds but I don't think humans can really say they 'domesticated' cats.
Campin_Cat
Veteran
Joined: 6 May 2014
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 25,953
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.
22 Dec 2016, 4:01 pm
22 Dec 2016, 6:49 pm
Sweetleaf wrote:
jcfay wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
The idea that animals don't feel pain the way humans do might be true with simpler forms of life, such as simpler insects, microscopic life, and such. But there is no way in hell that dogs, cats, whales, horses, and such do not. That's especially true for domesticated animals that have picked up on human emotion such as love. No one can tell me that the animals I've owned throughout my life didn't feel something for me, or that it was just my perception of wanting them to love me. Such emotions might not be as developed or complex among animals as it is among humans, but I absolutely believe it's there in some simpler form.
Agree. The only thing I'd challenge is that most if not all forms of life could feel pain. Pain provides us with an important stimulus, to avoid things that harm us. As such, it makes sense from an evolutionary perspective for it to exist in all creatures or most. I also don't like the idea that there are "lesser" forms of life (I realize this isn't what you were necessarily implying or thinking, I'm just continuing my rant
). What little I know about the biology of jelly fish, and some insects, and other flora/fauna, there are some amazing traits and behaviors out there that challenge the idea that they are "simpler" in any way. Just because we can't perceive it, doesn't mean it ain't there. I'd argue we should assume it is there unless sound data suggest otherwise (I like the ethical reasoning outlined elsewhere thats support this). And I totally agree that domesticated animals are unique, without a doubt. We've lived with them for eons, and we've selected them for specific traits, which obviously include some form of "emotional compatability" for lack of a better term. Pets have provided me with some of the greatest joys (and sorrows).
Actually I'd argue cats selected people as a species they could co-exist with and benefit from, rather than humans having selected cats....granted people have certainly influenced certain breeds but I don't think humans can really say they 'domesticated' cats.
Historically that does seem to be what happened. Cats first took up with us somewhere either in, or near Egypt, over five thousand years ago. Humans in the middle east began the practice of plow agriculture, and began to store surplus grain. The grain attracted rodents. And the rodents attracted the wild north african wild cat (closest cousin of the domestic cat) to come out of the desert, and to hang out in the storage buildings. The humans tolerated the cats because they ate the vermin. And it evolved from there.
22 Dec 2016, 7:02 pm
absolutely. i was speaking about dogs in this case, as far as us selecting them for specific traits (hence why we now have such bizarro breeds out there). I'm not sure how cats evolved into domestic short/longhairs, and then all of the specific "special" breeds, though. But regardless, we've certainly got a special bond with cats and dogs.
That story about the smart cat is outstanding! I'm going to have share that with my mom, she's a big cat person too... 
