Dogs Understand Human Smiles, Scowls

What you just described there ASSOCIATION is a LEARNING TRAINED process of reinforcement of desired behaivor no different then teaching a dog how to sit or fetch. Here is my version of what a famous old timer on here always says> You can teach a dog some tricks but you cant make them understand it LMAO.

 

I wont dispute that they will understand the meaning of happiness but it can be recognized just as they recognize and communicate their intensions through body language between one an other, no barking or sniffing required to interpret that.

 

Body language is observed and interpreted from actual interactions, a picture of a body is not, like TDK said they would tare that pic to shreds then interpret what is on that picture LMAO If they can even interpret that picture to begin with in the first place, which they cant LMAO.

I have a chihuahua she is the smartest dog I have ever owned. I showed her a pic of me , she ripped it to shreds does that mean she finds my face to be UGLY/HORRIBLE? LMAO....or maybe she just hates me? sigh I will never know why she tore my pic to shreds LMAO.

There are a LOT people who write all types of scientific theories of articles on the internet, the problem is when all those reading those dumb ass articles take them as truth, when there not and believe it just because some one did a scientific study on it LOL.

Scientifically studied Cock enhancement pills for sale only 39.95 they do work trust me its been scienfically studied by real scientist so you know its legit LMAO.

 

So much of the skepticism here has to do with (guffaw) showing photographs to dogs. How would I soften that tendency toward skepticism if it were I conducting the test? First I would make the photos full life size, possibly even make cutouts of them so as to render them as near three-dimensional as possible. Second, knowing full well that older more experienced dogs are going to react differently from pups, I would include different age groups among the test subjects. I would choose carefully the best times of day and under which circumstances the tests might be conducted. And lastly, because it would indeed be a testing process, I would do my best to set all presuppositions aside and be prepared to be surprised. For, of course, if I weren't embarking on a course of discovery I wouldn't do the test at all. I'd just sit back and pooh-pooh the whole process as if I'd already conducted the test and found it lacking.

 

If I blew up a life sized picture of you and a complete stranger would your dog have a different reaction to it? Would it bark at your life size photo as it was a stranger or would it be more curious? I don't personally know but I would suspect the later.

 

I seriously doubt the purpose of the test was to make dogs happier with photographs of their owners than with their actual flesh and blood owners. Most certainly the purpose of the test was to bring about a better understanding of dogs than we already have. As to the actual way in which the test was conducted, I'd bet my life the scientists were aware of more ways and means of it than any I've offered here. I honestly can't see how a test measuring a dog's reaction to various photographs of human beings might be viewed as an attempt at anthropomorphizing him.

Not that I view myself as any great defender of science, mind you. Truly, my skepticism is as great or greater than most. But I do take note of such scientific experiments that might well prove life (human, canine, or other) even more magical than I'd have guessed or imagined. I perk an ear and listen, weigh what I've heard, and finally intuit what to keep and what to toss aside.

 

Here is the thing you cant judge a dogs reaction too justify why he reacted that way to ANY picture unless you know what the dog was ACTUALLY thinking. For example if the dog barks at the stranger in the pic but tears your pic to shreds does that mean he liked the stranger more then you? LMAO Even if the dog barked at the strangers pic and not yours how do you know why he reacted that way? What if the dog barks at both pics? What if the dog barks at no pics? What if the dog shreds both pics? If one pic of you was fully nude and the other pic of you was fully clothed would the dog know the difference? LMAO If you had one picture of Megan fox and one picture of whoopie goldberg how would you know why the dog chose one pic over the other? If a male dog chooses a picture of a cock does it mean he is gay? If a female dog chooses a picture of a pussy does it mean she a lesbian? LMAOROTF.

Once again dogs do not comprehend concepts ,they can only understand the most primitive of basic emotional instincts like anger,aggression,dominance, happiness,sadness,hurt/sickness,fear and even then there understanding of those emotions are very limited.

 

I don't know the answer to that and would have to do some sort of test in order to gauge the results. To be a proper test it would have to be conducted under controlled circumstances, possibly with wires hooked to the dog to judge the differences in his reactions to both the photo of his owner and one of a stranger -- heart rate, blood pressure, or whatever -- for such differences might at times be more subtle than can be gauged by the eye. But again, I don't pooh-pooh scientific testings based solely upon some presupposed opposition on my part. For that's exactly what certain folks do when they shoot their mouths off about pit bulldogs being forced to fight, their being fed bait dogs, or whatever other nonsense they're "certain" of without having the faintest idea what they're talking about.

 

So what are you saying? Are you saying that when you and your dog feel sadness your sadness is somehow deeper than his? Deep enough to starve yourself to death over some tragedy that took a loved one from you? Are you saying that when you and your dog feel gladness your gladness is deeper and more joyous than his despite that he's the one leaping about and wagging his tail while you merely sit there with a big ol' smile on your face?

Come on, Saiyagin. All those most basic "instincts" you mention -- anger, aggression, and the rest -- can only be "understood" at the most primitive of levels whether by dog or man. And just because man can put such feelings into words doesn't mean he feels them any more deeply or profoundly than a dog can. And again, it seems to me our dogs often outdo us in that regard -- that they are more vulnerable than us in that regard, more susceptible to such feelings as we as humans become so skilled at numbing ourselves to. We have only to watch a dog at play for a moment or two to realize he has more to teach us about sheer joy than we have to teach him. And if that makes him somehow more "primitive" in his thought processes, then hooray for the primitive.

 

No one said the purpose of the test was to make dogs happier I think you misunderstood TDK's post. Better understanding of dogs then WE already have, who is WE? speak for yourself LOL.

So you would BET YOUR LIFE but you dont see your self as a GREAT DEFENDER of SCIENCE sounds like a oxymoron to me LOL. From my perspective your skepticism seems lesser then most of the people who replied to this topic LOL. Any science experiments that seem more magical then I could guess or imagined is usually when my bullshit alarm goes off LMAO.

 

Nope I am not talking about the LEVELS of emotional content, I am talking about the dog not being able to grasp CONCEPTS.

Again emotional content can be FELT at the most primitive levels but too fully understand them one needs to understand and know fully why or what made him feel that way. Only humans can comprehend and understand concepts dogs/animals cannot. Unless you believe animals can understand concepts fritz? If thats the case I need not further continue this debate LOL Its not about putting feelings into words but grasping the concept of those feelings. The better understanding of those feelings the more deeper and profoundly those feelings effect us to the point where some people commit suicide. You ever see a emotional distress dog commit suicide fritz? LMAO That is why dogs DONT out do us in that regard. Humans are the only one that can control and hide there feelings , dogs on the other hand cannot because they cant fully control there feelings because they DONT COMPREHEND them as fully as humans do hence why humans are more susceptible to such feelings regardless if we numb ourselves or not. If dogs had more to teach us then the dogs would be in charge which is why dogs are more primitive.

 

"If dogs had more to teach us then the dogs would be in charge which is why dogs are more primitive."

Like mixing apples and pomegranates comparing humans to dogs. Dogs are natural animals quite at home with who and what they are while we humans are essentially poor confused beings only wishing or pretending to know who and what we are. We're the guys and gal, after all, who ate the apple and lost our innocence. No, Saiyagin, the dogs no more have our wherewithal for learning our times tables than we have theirs for learning their innocence. Even despite that we humans are born with that same innocence we started out with, we very quickly see to it that we're totally rid of it by the time we start grade school.

So no and again, apples and pomegranates don't really mix -- the one puts the other on a leash and declares it "primitive." (You're meant to smile here.)

I do think this thread, fine as it is, has tended to sprawl forth in so many directions it comes very close to having lost its way entirely. And that's just the time, I think, when it does us all good to go back and read the original thread again carefully and in its entirety. For now that we've been round the Robin Hood's barn of it several times, I'm sure that each of us will glean a good deal more from it than we did the first time.

Give it another go?

 

Your thoughts are always appreciated, TD, and I do see where you're coming from on this. Tests like this one, experiments like this one -- I never look for earthshaking epiphanies so much as I seek a glimmer. Such tests are valuable to me even if they do no more than set me to thinking along a slightly different path, cause me somehow to take a slightly different tack, nudge me into at least several paragraphs I wouldn't have written otherwise, even if it's only a few posts on a chat board. And then one never knows when a mere few paragraphs will burgeon out into a full-fledged book, a novel perhaps. Always the writer, eh?

 

LMAO I know you are an educated well written man but this is funny shit my dogs are pretty sharp and they would bark at my life size pic as quick as yours.Sai and T have both nailed it in bout everyway imaginable.The rest of you are "but what if" "why not".I guess its something to read but not a valid debate.That study and your proposed study are both jokes.Trying to see dogs as more like human as T said.No disrespect just thought it was funny.yall should hook up with the aspca or hsus.This is right up there alley.lol

 

It's one thing to argue a point and another to jeer. I'll seldom dispute another's jeering. Your "LMAO" was the dead giveaway and your "aspca" and "hsus" accusation a mere mindless insult. But you're just chockful of abbreviations, aren't you? -- abbreviated words, abbreviated phrases, and, in short, abbreviated thought processes. And so you've summed yourself up, your post beginning with an "LMAO" and ending with a "lol." Well done... giggles.

 

Man its like reading a new age poet or riddle when you type fritz. LMAO Your the one mixing apple and oranges or pomegranates if you will fritz. The difference is humans can comprehend and understand the concept of innocence but dogs cannot LMAO. Not every one is TOTALLY RID of innocence by the time they start grade school. Some innocence is lost but a lot still remains in certain individuals and some more then others.

The one that wears the leash is primitive. Are you wearing a collar Fritz? Because I have a leash LMAO

This is one topic that people have stayed on the path unlike many other threads. I dont have to go back and re read the whole thread in its entirety because I already did that before I replied LOL I am not here to beat around Robin hoods barn I am here let the truth shine bright but sometimes that glare can blind some. LMAO