The role of empathy and humanising in understanding dogs.

ORIGINAL: jones

ETA... Of course it's fine to disagree or state an opposing viewpoint but what I would like to see is some explanation of how you come to that conclusion, and maybe an explanation of why the other doesn't work. "I say A" "You say B" doesn't provide much intellectual interest for me I'm afraid.

Explanation:

ORIGINAL: espencer

Of course if the dog has an accident and is in pain you wont ignore him and leave him there, you still are going to help but the feeling you bring with you is what can help him or damage him, if you come, help and you are calm at that moment the dog will feel your calmness and think that maybe is not as bas as it should, now if you come and comfort and you are nervous, the dog feels it and you will make it even more nervous, the dogs "feed" themselves from the attitude you have

espencer, I'm interested to hear more about why you feel that applying human psychology to dogs is a mistake. I would also like to know what you make of the physiological similarities between human and canine brains and how that may or may not be reflected in human & canine thought or psyche.

quote:

comforting frustration, fear, anxiety will nurture the behavior, you are fufilling your need of comforting first, you actually are doing the opposite of what you are trying to do and thats stopping him to feel that way, a common mistake, applying human psychology to a dog

Is that really true though? I think what corvus is trying to do here is question that point of view. If nothing else it does the mind good to think these things through, right? So... can we never apply "human psychology" to a dog? Since we aren't telepathic we have to ask the question whether dogs think they way we do. One side says no, they are dogs not humans, therefore they have dog-thoughts not human-thoughts. But let's look at the other side too. As the McConnell quote I posted above points out, there are a lot of observable similarities between dog and human physiology and biology... our brains look and are structured similarly with some differences (smaller and less wrinkled cortex most notably)... so is it a total fallacy to draw similarities between the thoughts & emotions of dogs and the thoughts & emotions of humans?

ETA... Of course it's fine to disagree or state an opposing viewpoint but what I would like to see is some explanation of how you come to that conclusion, and maybe an explanation of why the other doesn't work. "I say A" "You say B" doesn't provide much intellectual interest for me I'm afraid.

 
I think there is validity in Corvus' questioning. As I said before, DH is amazing with animals by trying to think like them.
 
We seperated for a year. I let him have custody of Tasha & Wolfgang because I knew that he truly provided the better home with the least upset. He went with me to get Floyd. Floyd had a bad, bad year. He was a stray, then bit the animal control officer and was impounded without leaving his cage for six months.
 
 There was a long drive involved so the original plan was that we'd meet, try to establish a bond then I'd pick Floyd up the next day to drive to his new home. I wanted Floyd very much and felt I could offer a great home. I met him armed with treats, toys & a ball but not leash and collar since we had planned for the next day. I wanted to measure first.  It went so well that we left with Floyd an hour later.
 
Obviously we had to stop and get a leash and collar. So DH stayed in the car with Floyd while I went into the store. When I returned he showed me the areas Floyd likes to be touched. Floyd and I then went to his home while he took Tasha & Wolfgang to see their Hugrammy.We sat in a dirt hole that Tasha had convieniently dug, and bonded for the next few hours.
 
From that time forward Floyd has been absolutely bonded to me. After we returned he's also bonded to DH, and I will say that DH probably saved his life. His massages find the smallest lumps in the most personal places. The last was only 8 mm.

Because for dogs a leader is more important than affection, which is not that way with humans, because a dog needs to feel someone is there to handle the situation first, because for a dog is more important that the person they look up to is not affected in the same way they are

Just like when we expect the president to take care of the things and we dont expect him to lay down on the grown and cry like a baby, and this example is a similarity between human and canine brains, just like we expect our dad to take care of the scary thing instead of be by our side feeling the same fear, the only difference is that for dogs if the leader had a mistake the dog still supports him/her, the human would start to have negative feelings about the leader, for the dog the leader will always make a better job no matter how lousy it was because thats why he is the leader, because that means that as lousy as he/she can be there is not other member that can do it better

Just like when a girl wants her man to be a man first, girls like the need to feel protected by him, very few feel atracted by a man that is a "crying baby", girls like their man to step up to the plate, to handle the situation "like a man", they dont want a guy that hides behind her skirt because he is afraid, thats not attractive

A pack survives because the leader confidence and calmness of doing things, a pack does not survive depending how much affection she/he can give, you feel more secure when you dad fixes the situation, not when your dad sits next to you to cry

A dog cant read your mind, he does not know you are trying to comfort him, he does not know whats the reason you are feeling sorry for, he only knows that your emotions are controling you and a leader that lets his/her emotions to control him/her is not a good leader

A human knows that if you comfort him you are trying to make him feel better, if you feel sorry for him is because you feel sympathy, but thats because that person is smart enough to figure that out in his mind, dogs cant, they only know you are being emotional unestable and emotional unestable packs dont survive out there

Yes.yes,yes,yes,yes,yes, you are able to give affection but only at the right time; after you prove to the dog you are in control of any danger out there, you can give affection to the dog when he is calm because you are nurturing exactly that, a calm and relaxed mind

You are telling your dog "hey i have your back, my emotions dont control me, we will get thru", thats what makes a dog feel secure in life

Fufill their need of excersice and they would have a stable non frustrated state of mind, just be calm (and assertive []) in every situation and you would be fufilling one of the most important needs in a dog's life, the need to feel they have a good leader, after that you can give them all the love you have in your heart to give, that way his and your needs will be fufilled equally

The funny thing is that I took in a Malinois with a known bite history. We believed there were extenuating circumstances combined with breeding that caused his bite. Floyd bit the animal control officer. He was a stray and very underweight. He was then considered a viscious dog and imprisioned without exercise for months. His foster mom really stuck a leg out.
 
She also let him go to a home that by many would be considered inexperienced. But maybe, she knew just what she was doing. She is an extremely experienced person. We know Floyd very, very well and make accomodations for him. Because of Floyd's bite history and potential for fear aggression, as well as his breed, we deem it safest for him to "go to his room/bed" when someone arrives.
 
The calming techniques combined with age and living with other dogs have worked wonders. DH has inate skill and I've learned a lot.I focus a lot on nutrition. Floyd got three grade II mast cell cancers. He's fine now but had a difficult time. He had the stitches from the first surgery removed at the time of the second surgery.
 
He does get a lot of exercise. He's a Malinois. Do you believe that you would have provided a better outcome for Floyd?

espencer I agree with a lot of what you're saying but I don't see how this is a response to jones' question.... it seems completely removed from what jones was asking.

So, the topic of this discussion is how far we should humanise our dogs (if at all) in order to better empathise, with the expectation that empathy will lead to enhanced understanding. Does empathy lead to enhanced understanding in the first place?

I don't think that empathy *leads* to understanding - it in itself *is* understanding. Being empathetic means you understand me, at least understand my basic needs as a human being.

You can never empathize with a dog, in a true sense of this word, not until, you'll find what he needs. That's why we have this forum-"What do they want? How do they feel?"

I don't think it's ever possible to completely detach yourself from 'human psychology'. One can't claim "I am not using human psychology", at least not until he finds THE TRUTH, or becomes 'it', like the guy form the the Matrix...

So yes, I guess I do humanise my dog, but I think it enhances our relationship rather than diminishing it. I think my dog's trust in me has improved a heap since I developed more sensitivity towards her and a more gentle way of dealing with her.

By definition, to humanize is to make something humane or civilized. Of course, we can only apply what works for people to a dog (if we don't know any better). Now, that's an important step in communication process. Some people stop there:

People like being hugged when worried or stressed. I am going to hug and cuddle my dog Sofie because she looks worried... Hmm, Sofie wants to get out, let me squeeze her harder, talk to her softer... Sofie doesn't like it - what a weird dog! Sofie bites.

You can humanize, all you want, but you need to watch your dog and adjust your actions. Humanizing, I think, is an emotion that leads us to wonder. First wonder, then act, then observe, then act again more appropriately, etc.

I don't think it was 'humanizing' itself was what helped you enhance your relationship with your dog, corvus, ... it's what humanizing enabled you to observe.

ORIGINAL: jones

comforting frustration, fear, anxiety will nurture the behavior, you are fufilling your need of comforting first, you actually are doing the opposite of what you are trying to do and thats stopping him to feel that way, a common mistake, applying human psychology to a dog

Is that really true though? I think what corvus is trying to do here is question that point of view. If nothing else it does the mind good to think these things through, right? So... can we never apply "human psychology" to a dog? Since we aren't telepathic we have to ask the question whether dogs think they way we do. One side says no, they are dogs not humans, therefore they have dog-thoughts not human-thoughts. But let's look at the other side too. As the McConnell quote I posted above points out, there are a lot of observable similarities between dog and human physiology and biology... our brains look and are structured similarly with some differences (smaller and less wrinkled cortex most notably)... so is it a total fallacy to draw similarities between the thoughts & emotions of dogs and the thoughts & emotions of humans?

Thank you jones. [] I seem to be having trouble communicating the way I feel about this, but that's pretty much it.

What I don't like is this rigid idea that we must NEVER treat our dogs like people. Yes, I understand that dogs are dogs and not people. Don't get me wrong. I didn't pursue a career in animals because I think they're cute, fluffy children. I pursued a career with animals because when I watch an animal doing it's own thing independently of myself, it's like I'm given a window into their world. To me, it's magical that something could exist with it's own agenda, it's own understanding of the world and everything in it, it's own priorities, and all of these things with no regard for me, a human. It's terribly basic and obvious, but maybe so basic and obvious that people rarely bother to notice.

So I adore dogs for being dogs. But at the same time, I don't like the idea that I must never offer comfort to a dog that obviously wants it lest I commit the number one sin of treating my dog like a human. I just don't believe that offering comfort teaches a dog that it's okay to be afraid and perpetuates fear. My dog doesn't really like cuddles, but when she's very hurt, she'll come to me and when I crouch down to check her over, she rests her head on my shoulder and leans into me. She's telling me, something's really wrong with me and I need you. I put my arms around her and she relaxes and whimpers, telling me all about it. I pour sympathy on her because it's what people do, not for her, but she soaks it up until she feels better, and then she's back to her usual self. Next time she steps on a thorn, does she come over looking for cuddles and sympathy? No. She licks her foot once, I check it and she tells me it doesn't hurt very much and so I let her go and she bounces off happily. Where is the problem, here? Quite frankly, I think it's very useful to have a dog that comes looking for cuddles when she's in a lot of pain. It tells me in no uncertain terms that something's very wrong.

Now I do believe there is truth in this idea of being calm to tell your dog there's nothing to fear. I do it all the time and it works. When Penny wants to come inside because there's thunder about, I let her in calmly and let her find a place to huddle where she feels safe. I don't smooch at her or coddle her or give her strokes or cuddles. I just leave her to it. Nothing wrong with this, but it is rather how you deal with children that are afraid of something they'll have to get used to. Just like you give children cuddles and sympathy when they're badly hurt. My problem is, why is there such a desperate need to deny these similarities? No, dogs are not small children, but yes, they do have things in common. Why can't I treat those similarities the same way? I treat similarities I see in my wild hare and my dog the same way, does that mean that I don't understand that hares and dogs are not the same? Of course not, because it's the similarities that matter, not the differences in those cases.

What I'm proposing is not that we should think of dogs as anything other than dogs, or to try to make them into anything other than dogs. Yes, dogs are perfect as they are. I'm proposing that it's okay to see similarities between dogs and people and treat those similarities in the same manner.

I feel that the constant litany of "Oh, but you're a human and your dog is a dog and treating a dog like a human ever is satisfying only your own needs" stunts our capacity to put ourselves in our dog's place and imagine what it's like. The quote from Patricia McConnell is just what I'm trying to get at. Why is it so wrong to think you might have something in common with your dog? Or that your dog might have things in common with small children? How else can we begin to try to understand if we never try to imagine what it's like for them from our oh-so-flawed human perspective? What I'm looking for, here, is flexibility. We know the fundamental truth that dogs aren't people, and we know the troubles that treating them such can cause, however, what are we missing if we dismiss any similarities we sense between our dogs and us because we're so concerned with thinking of our dogs as dogs and not people?

ORIGINAL: espencer

Because for dogs a leader is more important than affection, which is not that way with humans, because a dog needs to feel someone is there to handle the situation first, because for a dog is more important that the person they look up to is not affected in the same way they are

The way I see it, you ARE fulfilling your dog's need for a leader even if you are emotional at the time. Can leaders really be expected to be calm at all times? When I came home to find my dog lying in the rain on the doorstep because part of her spinal cord was pushing against a weakened vertebra and she couldn't hop up to her kennel, you can bet that I wasn't especially cool and collected. Did I wail and run around like a madman? Well, no. But I did cry when it became apparent how badly she hurt. For a moment, we just sat there together, feeling painfully sorry for how much pain she was in. I'm pretty sure my heart was pounding because at that stage I didn't know what was wrong with her or how bad it was. I spoke softly to her, but she trembled, maybe just from the pain, as I've seen her tremble when I'm being perfectly calm and businesslike, but maybe because she could tell I was scared for her. In a few moments, I got up and helped her up to my room where she collapsed into her bed and didn't move for the rest of the evening. Sometimes, I went to her and stroked her because there was nothing else I could do for her pain but to offer some physical comfort. Maybe it was more for me than her, but I think she appreciated it.

That was one of the most distessing things I've ever experienced, but I don't feel I let my dog down by being emotional. When my dog crowded close to me to tell me how much she hurt, I got the sense she was intensely relieved that I'd come home and I'd take care of her, now. I don't think I encouraged her to feel afraid by being afraid myself. She was too preoccupied with her own pain to be anything but relieved that I was with her. When her pain faded away, her anxiety went with it, even though my anxiety was still there because I still didn't know how serious it was.

The other day I was in the vet's waiting room and someone had come to pick up their dog just out of surgery. When the dog came through, she and her owner spent a long, beautiful moment communicating. I don't know all of what passed between them, but I can guess it went something along the lines of the dog expressing the fear and pain she had so recently experienced, and her owner saying "I know, I'm here now." The owner waited until her dog was finished, and then they both left, not as if nothing had happened, but as if everything was okay, now. It's these moments that make me think it's important to be flexible with our dogs. Sometimes being a leader is basically being a mother, and what is motherhood without a hefty dose of understanding, acceptance, and loving guidance? I think we should be able to dump everything we know about dogs and act purely on instinct in critical moments. A dog in agony is a critical moment, as is a dog in hysterics, or a dog in a panic. I still hold that it's far healthier to sit with a panicked dog and calm it with your presence and soothing words and strokes than to let that dog charge around the house because being calm yourself isn't doing it for the dog. I've been in that situation, and I think I did the right thing.

In fact our touchy, feely, empathetic life first led to the adoption of Tasha a Golden Retriever/Chow and, Wolfgang, a Malinois Akita.
 
Both are excellent dogs. Wolfgang has some less than perfect behavior but has a huge fan club. He's just about the nicest dog out there. Tasha is a sweetheart.
 
Do you really think you'd do better with Tasha, Wolfgang & Floyd than we have? Do you believe we should change our ways? Or did we just manage to adopt easy dogs?

I look at this way: I don't need my dogs to be totally unafraid of everything. Some things are scary and distressing. They're dogs, not robots. I think we all know our own dogs best and know when it's the time to just help them soldier through by not rewarding their fear response, but at other times there's nothing wrong with that.
 
Conrad is a very anxious dog. The first time he met our new vet, the vet remarked, "Wow, he's not the most self-confident dog, is he?" No, he's not, not in the human world at least (he's quite comfortable and confident around other dogs and out in nature). We've worked a lot with him and I tend to be more careful with him to not reward his anxieties. But honestly when he seriously hurts himself or has a major scare, I will comfort him. These are things that it's okay to have a startle or fear response to and in those moments I'll be his "mom" and attempt to calm him.
 
Marlowe will only seek comfort with me if he is really really uneasy, and this is rare. When he seeks my comfort, I give it because I know it's serious. The fact that I give  him comfort when he is afraid doesn't make him afraid more. I give him love and attention all the time, he's not starved for it so he's not going to automatically think "I want attention, maybe I should do what I did to get attention last time and act afraid." He gets attention all the damn time and his times of fear are very few and far between.
 
Different dogs, different personalities, different needs.
 
As to the larger topic: I pretty much treat my dogs like I've treated my students. The basic concepts are the same, its just the implementation that needs to be different because they have a differently wired brain. But my attitudes towards rules, teaching, learning, behavior, affection, those are the same no matter if we're talking about kids or dogs.  I don't think you should spoil kids, nor do I think you should spoil dogs. Sometimes I get the impression that "dogs aren't humans" is just code for "don't spoil your dog." But seriously, don't spoil your kids either. It's not a good idea for either species.

ORIGINAL: corvus

The way I see it, you ARE fulfilling your dog's need for a leader even if you are emotional at the time.

Remember the president and father examples i gave before? how would you feel if they try to fix the things while they are crying? now how would you feel if they do it with all the confidence they have in their heart? which one would make you feel more is the more competent?

ORIGINAL: corvus

Can leaders really be expected to be calm at all times?

Yes, in the dog's world if you are not calm you wont survive, your emotions wont let you take th best decisions and you could take the pack to extinction but before that happens someone else will try to take your place if he or she is confident enough because you are emotional unestable and cant run the pack properly

It seems that you are a very emotional girl by the way you described the example of your dog in pain, thats fine, but maybe you are just here looking right and left for someone to tell you that you are right when you are nurturing the fear, nervousness, or anxious emotions that your dog has by feeling sorry or comfort him

I know is hard for some people to control their emotions, even harder if you are a girl, but if you really really really care about your dog you wont be nurturing those unestable behaviors by comfort him at that moment

I would love to give affection to my dog 24/7 too, that makes me really really happy, but before my needs i think about her needs, i know that sometimes fufilling my needs at the wrong moment is actually hurting her more than helping her, is not all about me, thats the way it is in the dogs life and i would have to accept it if i want to have the happiest dog i can have, comforting the unestable behavior even when i know i should not would make me feel selfish, but hey thats just me

And i ask this to everybody: Can someone here say that comforting the dog when is fearful, nervous, anxious, etc is actually not nurturing the behavior?

I know is hard for some people to control their emotions, even harder if you are a girl

 
That says it all for me... I like to think that I can walk away from an unproductive argument so here I go.

ORIGINAL: espencer

ORIGINAL: corvus

The way I see it, you ARE fulfilling your dog's need for a leader even if you are emotional at the time.

Remember the president and father examples i gave before? how would you feel if they try to fix the things while they are crying? now how would you feel if they do it with all the confidence they have in their heart? which one would make you feel more is the more competent?

Well, I don't think it's a matter of competence. Is my dog assessing my competence when she thinks she might be dying? I doubt it, just as long as I'm there for her. Like Cressida said, sometimes it helps to be more mum than leader. I can say for sure that if I'm hurting I'd rather have someone give me a cuddle and some love then calmly check me over in a businesslike fashion. That's what I do when my dog is limping or merely looking blue, but geez, if she's looking for reassuring cuddles, what kind of heartless cretin would I be if I refused? We're talking a quiet petting, here, not hysterical, grabby squeezes or goo goo baby noises and kisses. She gets as much physical contact as she seems to want and some quiet words. She breaks the contact, not me. All I'm doing is responding to her need of the moment, and it's such a rare need that I'd be fool to ignore what it tells me. Frankly, it's very handy to have a dog that will come and look for special reassurance if something is very wrong. Hopefully I've worked it out by then, but at least I know if I'm particularly dull she'll find a way to tell me.

ORIGINAL: corvus

Can leaders really be expected to be calm at all times?

Yes, in the dog's world if you are not calm you wont survive, your emotions wont let you take th best decisions and you could take the pack to extinction but before that happens someone else will try to take your place if he or she is confident enough because you are emotional unestable and cant run the pack properly

Show me a wild pack leader that is always calm and I'll believe that. Like I pointed out once before, anything other than calmness is a form of communication. Are you trying to tell me a wolf alpha is never aggressive?? Because that's not calm. Are you trying to tell me an alpha wolf, meeting a rival pack on their turf, would not be a little anxious, even with its pack behind it? These emotions exist for a reason, and that's because they do help animals survive. An anxious wolf is a wary wolf, and he sends the message to his pack that something is indeed wrong. They're just animals, and an alpha is no less prey to its natural responses of basic emotion than any other animal, including humans. I can stay cool and clear-headed when a dog is attacking, but my heart still pounds and my face might flush and my body go tense. I'd quite like to see you maintain this utter calm you speak of when you're looking at your own dog in so much pain she can't even stand. If you could do that, I'd call you sub-human.

It seems that you are a very emotional girl by the way you described the example of your dog in pain, thats fine, but maybe you are just here looking right and left for someone to tell you that you are right when you are nurturing the fear, nervousness, or anxious emotions that your dog has by feeling sorry or comfort him

I know is hard for some people to control their emotions, even harder if you are a girl, but if you really really really care about your dog you wont be nurturing those unestable behaviors by comfort him at that moment

Just because I don't act like a robot around my dog doesn't mean I'm overly emotional. If you'd seen my dog that night, I imagine you would have cried, too. Like I've said, I don't think that I'm nurturing fear and anxiety by accepting them in my dog. As Cressida said, my dog is also not a robot. She feels, and that's okay. I want her to have normal responses to pain, anxiety, fear, frustration. That's what makes her a living creature. In those responses, she communicates to me. The way she communicates when she desires comfort is totally different to the way she communicates when she is unsure of herself. Just because I give her comfort when she's especially afraid or hurt does not mean I'm encouraging her to feel afraid or hurt. Those emotions of hers do exist independently of me. She is an independent being, and she doesn't like being afraid or hurt. The payoff from me is not enough to make her wish that upon herself. Just like I wouldn't cut off a finger for the sympathy it might get me. Come on, she's not stupid, and nor am I. We have an understanding. I don't give her comfort unless she looks for it and she doesn't look for it unless something is very wrong. I'm yet to see her look for it if something is not very wrong.

How can you say I'm nurturing it if it's frequency doesn't increase or its use broaden?

Corvus I still trying to think this through.  TinaK post mentioned key words that related to both humans and dogs.  Need and want.  Think of the want as the fuel that drives emotional intensity for the need.  Empathy is the bridge to understanding the want.  Use hunger as the feeling.  If the human understand the want through empathy then the human knows the measure of food to give.  It still comes down to interpreting the behavior of want and aligning that behavior with the human understanding (empathy).