A deep question: why so many people here have cat avatars?

Post Reply New Topic

@Anomiel: I don't disagree with what you have said. Animals do have emotions. But their emotions are much more basic than ours. Animals can feel fear, contentment, curiosity, playfulness, attachment (mainly for reasons of procreation and survival) and dogs can pine for someone, depending on the animal and the size of its brain and how it's wired. Dogs have a lot more emotions than the wolves they descended from purely because wolves found that they would get more food from humans by being co-operative and this meant the more friendly wolves bred more, like natural selection. A lizard does not have the same emotions as a dog for instance. Animals just don't have the same level or complexity of emotions as humans and I think humans all too frequently personify animal behaviours which do not have the same cause as an apparently similar behaviour by a human. I don't care whether anyone likes cats any more than anyone cares that I don't much, it's all irrelevant. I'm just stating facts.

I know how animals got domesticated, though they say the cats chose us, and the dogs got bred to be that way - dogs are basically infantilized wolves in a very real way, it's very fascinating (talking about domestication, have you read the current experiment in domesticating foxes in russia? The animals got more sociable, as expected, and started showing signs similar to Williams syndrome. Which is almost the opposite of Asperger's... Maybe we're all just wild humans). Argh you hit the special-interest button! I could talk about this in more detail but trying not to...

Well the issue is if gaining something negates having emotions about it? Like your example with the cat who you say only wants warmth - wanting warmth doesn't disprove that the cat might still love his/her owner, or that the very obvious signs of affection are genuine and not in an effort to manipulate. And then we're back to the "does love or altruism exist or not"-threads that Qawer started to disprove that love (for humans) didn't exist because they gained something by it. As if that disproves love. There were some good arguments there, but not getting into that now.
Yes humans frequently anthropomorphize animals, and because that isn't correct as animals aren't humans doesn't mean that animals are actually personality-less and unfeeling - that is going for the opposite extreme in thinking (not that you necessarily think that).
Maybe lizards cannot feel love, but they are different from us and are infamous for having a much simpler kind of brain - so maybe yes, that does play a part, but I think that anything more similar to us can feel love, and maybe reptilians too. Just because we doesn't recognize it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Google "David Icke", he believes the reptilian people are among us (amongst other things).

Maybe a few heads of state are reptilian people...

Oh I didn't mean those kind of reptilians He has discovered (for himself) the mystery that some people do not have the RH protein on their blood, and as there actually are no explanation for it, jumped to conclusions.
That mystery is very fascinating, and we probably are different on some fundamental level (the high rates of schizophrenia and autism gives me some inkling of in what way) but we aren't reptilians.

This comment makes me question how much actual exposure you've had to cats, and why you are overreacting to the notion of "anthropomorphizing" cats that you rush toan extreme opposite as if it is somehow more accurate to simply deny any similarities. I think there's a risk of people falling for notions of "human exceptionalism" wherein humans are special and animals only act from very basic, very simple motives, despite having neurologies with similar structures and functions.

The science is also leaving this perspective behind. I don't think that what you wrote is actually accepted by many behavioral researchers these days, and it fails to explain the full range of animal behaviors.

Perhaps it is anthropomorphizing these emotions to claim they belong only to humans.

Also, cats can manipulate human emotions: http://www.livescience.com/5556-cats-co ... finds.html

And look at this: http://news.discovery.com/animals/zoo-a ... 110224.htm

Agree with what you said.
I think it's just a reaction to (what feels like) the whole world liking cats, and then people saying that we are like cats, while personally not liking cats and being offended by the idea.
I absolutely adore them though.

I don't think so. I just think there are a few schools of thought about animal behavior. Some gravitate to the notion that animals are nothing like us beyond basic needs, and come up with sometimes convoluted rationalizations as to why human and animal behavior are compatible. Some gravitate to the notion that animals are just like us and come up with sometimes convoluted rationalizations as to what animals are doing. Some realize that while humans and animals are different from each other, they're not all that different and share some features in common.

"Just so" explanations like "cats only come to you for warmth" fail to take into account the complexity of actual animal behavior and the possibility that they are capable of thoughts, emotions, and motivations - that they're not as complex as us does not mean they exist at a baseline simplicity, either.

Ah well, maybe so. But that is the explanation to how one can come to believe such things, and I've seen it before. But going around proclaiming it in a thread where the topic is how much people like cats, that is a reaction caused by what I said in my comment, I guess. I thought you meant why she was upset here
That was the cause for people rejecting Darwin - that and religion, but a distorted view of animals was the major component.

I was thinking I only make physical contact with my mum for the pleasant sensation. I squeeze the fat on her stomach or poke it or I trace the lines of her feet. We don't really hug and kiss or anything.....we don't do much social touching. I do love my mum and wouldn't do it to anyone else. Maybe I also do it because of a need to be close to my mum but part of it is for the sensation, kind of like stimming.

Anyway , I agree that even though humans may not do things with PURELY altruistic intent because they might consider that doing X good deed would also make them feel good, there is still a selfless desire. It's mixed motivation. Humans are more complex than cats, of course but it's still quite possible that cats have mixed motivation too and part of their motivation for "cuddling" has to do with a desire to be close to a particular person that they care about. Certainly they're also seeking warmth from physical contact but there could be more to it.

I've had a lot of exposure to cats, I have lived in two separate houses for long periods where each person I shared with in each of those houses owned three cats apiece. Overreacting is the wrong terminology and implies a high level of emotion. I was totally calm when I made my comments and was not feeling emotional when I wrote them. I also don't agree that it's an extreme view or that I rushed to that view (it was formed over time and much observation of cats). You are making wild assumptions based on your defensiveness because you are a cat-lover.

If you can show me proof that I am wrong I will be willing to accept that proof. However, behavioural researchers can only ever hypothesise until such proof exists, and just because they don't understand all the facts yet doesn't mean you can fit this to mean what you want it to mean. The reason humans have such long gestations compared to most other animals, and the reason the young stay with the parents for so very long compared to I would imagine *all* other animals, is because our brains are so much more complex and capable of so much more and it takes that long to create a brain capable of everything humans can do, as well as continue that learning process.

Are you saying that a cat has the same amount of connections and brain ratio as a human being? Again, I stand to be corrected but I highly doubt that this is the case.

What you say about cats manipulating human emotions is part of my very point. Cats are highly selfish creatures, they are only interested in their needs - hence the manipulation! Thanks for the links, I've had a look but there was nothing in them to change my views.

Last edited by whirlingmind on 20 Apr 2013, 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wrong on all counts. I have no reason to care what other people like, that's their choice, it has no effect on me or my emotions and I most certainly would never be offended by it. It seems there is however, offence caused by me expressing that I am not a cat fan to you. Furthermore, it wasn't a reaction either, I have as much right to post in this thread as anyone else, just because I'm not a cat fan doesn't mean I can't express my valid opinion: I do not believe Aspies and cats are "alike", and in one of the links Verdandi posted it confirmed even more that cats are generally popular (although not as you described it as "the whole world" liking cats!), it's not just an Aspie thing.

BTW - what on earth do you base your assertion that I am upset on? Nothing could be further from the truth. You seem to keep totally misunderstanding my posts - at least Verdandi approaches it from a rational perspective. You on the other hand appear to be becoming emotional.

And your obvious little attempts at drawing Verdandi into a childish siding against me are rather boring. I have "proclaimed" nothing, just given my views (which you seem to think you know the reasons for and are wrong)...try to stay calm and factual and not read into peoples' posts what isn't there.

Last edited by whirlingmind on 20 Apr 2013, 8:28 pm, edited 3 times in total.

That's just another word for communication. Cats can communicate their wants. That's not all they communicate about though. Most humans can communicate their wants - does that make us incapable of feeling love too?

Of course they are not the same!

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/manipulation

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/communication

But that's just semantics, and poor word choice by the journalists (or maybe even the researchers, didn't check). They communicate in more ways than just that too. They can communicate, and want to communicate, I find it fantastic.

It's not semantics, read Verdandi's links and you will see for yourself. The fact that they do other things, does not mean that they don't manipulate too.

Okay. But not all humans stating their wants do so for some nefarious purpose. If you are their sole provider of food, of course they are going to ask for food for their own survival. Not a big deal.