The role of empathy and humanising in understanding dogs.

corvus, at the risk of extending this argument, I have to say that I agree with your assessment of how it is important to treat dogs like the "independent beings" they are.  I don't coddle fear of ordinary objects and happenings, but if one of my dogs picks up a paw because he has stepped on rock salt and it smarts, I will certainly brush the paw off and offer some comfort.  I believe my dogs understand the subtle difference in that.  

Sally can be a fearful dog at times.  One of the best analogies I've read in regard to dealing with fearful dogs is something like this (I can't remember where I read it either): "If you were on a plane you thought was going down, would you rather have the pilot sitting in the seat next to you telling you it will all be OK, or do you want him up there flying the plane?"  I always do my best to be the one flying the plane for Sally.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

I don't coddle fear of ordinary objects and happenings, but if one of my dogs picks up a paw because he has stepped on rock salt and it smarts, I will certainly brush the paw off and offer some comfort.  I believe my dogs understand the subtle difference in that.  

And thats exactly what i am saying, give comfort by helping, dont give comfort by feeling sorry

ORIGINAL: corvus

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.

Yes you are, not encouraging her to feel more hurt but for sure more afraid, feeling sorry for her at that moment is what its making it worse, even if it is life or death situation you are making it even worse

Now the simple fact to come and help is comforting enough for the dog, you are telling her you have her back, that you are there to fix the situation, but dont take the things out of context and think that in my mind i'm like "dont be a sissy, this is nothing" no, in my mind, or even saying it i'm like "hey dont worry i will fix that right away and you will be fine in no time" thats the state of mind you need to have, calm but letting the dog know that you will get everything under control, feeling sorry is not having it under control

Think as like when you are sick, you have a cold, and a family member comes and says something to you like "oh my God lets go to the hospital right now because you can die at any moment, you can get worse than that" thats what you are saying to your dog by feeling sorry for her, but if the same family member comes and says something like "hey i brought chicken soup so you can feel better" thats what you are telling your dog by being calm, by being calm you are showing your dog that everything is going to be fine, by feeling sorry you are telling the dog it might be worse than it is

I never said they are "robots", i never said they should be like soldiers, i remember saying that if your dog is hurt you should go and help, no question about it and i remember i said that is the feeling you are bringing with you at that moment the one that can make things better or worse

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?

Sorry I'm so late in coming in on this one, but just wanted to say what a powerfully thought provoking paragraph that was.  I have always subscribed to the view that "dogs are dogs, not people!"  "comforting when they are afraid reinforces the fearful behaviour and the fear itself".... Now I'm beginning to think a more middle of the road approach might be kinder because that way of thinking, while valid up to a point, seems to be (when held in light of that post) throwing the baby out with the bath water.
 

  I never said they are "robots", i never said they should be like soldiers, i remember saying that if your dog is hurt you should go and help, no question about it and i remember i said that is the feeling you are bringing with you at that moment the one that can make things better or worse

 
Dogs cannot sense feelings.  They are extremely perceptive yes, but they are not mediums.  If your dog is afraid or in pain, then it's OK to feel bad right along with him - it's pretty hard not to when you care deeply.  Be aware of the signals you send and if appropriate be calm and aloof to show them there is nothing to be concerned about, yes I get that completely.  In the cases where this is most necessary the dogs' own feelings are running high and to see a dog that anxious and that stressed out is painful to watch.  It doesn't mean you will fail at showing the dog there's nothing to be afraid of just because you are aware of and open to that stress and fear.  I seriously doubt whether anyone who lacks that kind of compassion should own a dog and I make no apologies for saying so.

Chuffy
 
I seriously doubt whether anyone who lacks that kind of compassion should own a dog and I make no apologies for saying so.

 
answer:
 

espencer
 
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

 
Forgive me if i rather to help my dog more than hurting her
 
Oh and by the way if somebody forgot: Can someone here say that comforting the dog when is fearful, nervous, anxious, etc is actually not nurturing the behavior?

When you comfort a crying baby, are you nurturing that behavior? Or are you just seeing that your child's needs are met, including the less physical ones such as closeness and attention.

ORIGINAL: houndlove

When you comfort a crying baby, are you nurturing that behavior? Or are you just seeing that your child's needs are met, including the less physical ones such as closeness and attention.

 
Do you really expect me to answer that? here is a clue that maybe, just maybe you've heard before: Dogs are not (paste the answer here)

Yes we know that espence.  But as corvus so rightly pointed out there are similarities.  And, my view (which is beginning to change thanks to this thread) is that to ignore those similarities completely when dealing with behaviour is, as I said before, baby and bath water.  I think houndlove has made an excellent point and its not irelevant just because it's a different species to a dog.  All species have emotional needs and where are we to start from other than considering our own and going from there?  We can't get inside the dog's head and poke about and see what's really going on.  The best we can do is guesswork and that is a fact.
 
In addition I think your previous post might be directed at me.  My answer is that you can help your dog with the signals you send - I am sure this is what you do.  In my last post I was just saying for the benefit of anyone else reading the thread that you don't have to have a heart dead inside you to do that.  You don't have to switch off your own emotions in the belief that they are invalid because you are human and not a dog.  Someone else on another thread spoke of the importance of occasionally dropping the analysis, forgetting what we think we know about dogs and wolves and their behaviour and how they communicate..... (because it is just what we think we know, no matter how often we see it presented as fact) and simply open up and make an honest attempt to communicate with another being.  (Sorry to that member for nicking their words.)

Want to know another thing dogs aren't? Robots.

ORIGINAL: espencer

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

I completely agree with you...and I am a girl. []

"Nurturing" is part of female "psychology". Study any social mammal group, and you will see this. Nurturing is very self rewarding to the female nature. This includes the feeding (nursing) of the very young. Yet, the mothers in the wild also teach the young ones social boundaries at the same time.

I've seen plenty of spoiled little "mommy's darlings" dogs, to know when displaced female nurturing has gone very wrong and created a spoiled brat.

Men are not exempt from spoiling dogs, but it seems to come from a different place. I man will indulge his emotions and feel comfortable with a dog, while ignoring his wife, because a dog is not as emotionally draining as a human relationship. Not neccessarily "heathy" either, but just as understandable as where females tend to mess up based on their own "gender" programming.

Human empathy can sometimes crossover into an "over-nurturing" relm with women when their dogs become their little psuedo-children (fur babies) and they begin self-fullfilling their nurturing needs.

Empathy in the relm of self-fulfillment and the projections of human emotions upon dogs may be self-rewarding for the humans, but honoring another species, is to treat them and respect them as the species they were designed by nature to be, understanding them, and fulfilling their needs, first.

In a dog's mind, the lending of comfort may simply be seen as a behavior by a nervous, unstable packmember (who is reinforcing by there own behavior) that there is something in the current situation to fear, and by their actions convey to the dog they they are looking for comfort, rather than lending it.

Our comforting  and epathetic behaviors are sometimes lost on a dog and do the opposite of lend comfort.

IMO

ORIGINAL: houndlove

Want to know another thing dogs aren't? Robots.

 
Hey guess what? i already talked about that, or you are slow today or you just read what you want []
 

ORIGINAL: espencer

I never said they are "robots", i never said they should be like soldiers, i remember saying that if your dog is hurt you should go and help, no question about it and i remember i said that is the feeling you are bringing with you at that moment the one that can make things better or worse

ORIGINAL: Angelique

ORIGINAL: espencer

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

I completely agree with you...and I am a girl. []

"Nurturing" is part of female "psychology". Study any social mammal group, and you will see this. Nurturing is very self rewarding to the female nature. This includes the feeding (nursing) of the very young. Yet, the mothers in the wild also teach the young ones social boundaries at the same time.

I've seen plenty of spoiled little "mommy's darlings" dogs, to know when displaced female nurturing has gone very wrong and created a spoiled brat.

Men are not exempt from spoiling dogs, but it seems to come from a different place. I man will indulge his emotions and feel comfortable with a dog, while ignoring his wife, because a dog is not as emotionally draining as a human relationship. Not neccessarily "heathy" either, but just as understandable as where females tend to mess up based on their own "gender" programming.

Human empathy can sometimes crossover into an "over-nurturing" relm with women when their dogs become their little psuedo-children (fur babies) and they begin self-fullfilling their nurturing needs.

Empathy in the relm of self-fulfillment and the projections of human emotions upon dogs may be self-rewarding for the humans, but honoring another species, is to treat them and respect them as the species they were designed by nature to be, understanding them, and fulfilling their needs, first.

In a dog's mind, the lending of comfort may simply be seen as a behavior by a nervous, unstable packmember (who is reinforcing by there own behavior) that there is something in the current situation to fear, and by their actions convey to the dog they they are looking for comfort, rather than lending it.

Our comforting  and epathetic behaviors are sometimes lost on a dog and do the opposite of lend comfort.

IMO

[sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif]

If someone else has questions after that then that person just wants to argue []

ORIGINAL: Angelique

ORIGINAL: espencer

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

I completely agree with you...and I am a girl. []

"Nurturing" is part of female "psychology". Study any social mammal group, and you will see this. Nurturing is very self rewarding to the female nature. This includes the feeding (nursing) of the very young. Yet, the mothers in the wild also teach the young ones social boundaries at the same time.

I've seen plenty of spoiled little "mommy's darlings" dogs, to know when displaced female nurturing has gone very wrong and created a spoiled brat.

Men are not exempt from spoiling dogs, but it seems to come from a different place. I man will indulge his emotions and feel comfortable with a dog, while ignoring his wife, because a dog is not as emotionally draining as a human relationship. Not neccessarily "heathy" either, but just as understandable as where females tend to mess up based on their own "gender" programming.

Human empathy can sometimes crossover into an "over-nurturing" relm with women when their dogs become their little psuedo-children (fur babies) and they begin self-fullfilling their nurturing needs.

Empathy in the relm of self-fulfillment and the projections of human emotions upon dogs may be self-rewarding for the humans, but honoring another species, is to treat them and respect them as the species they were designed by nature to be, understanding them, and fulfilling their needs, first.

In a dog's mind, the lending of comfort may simply be seen as a behavior by a nervous, unstable packmember (who is reinforcing by there own behavior) that there is something in the current situation to fear, and by their actions convey to the dog they they are looking for comfort, rather than lending it.

Our comforting  and epathetic behaviors are sometimes lost on a dog and do the opposite of lend comfort.

IMO

Okay, my only problem with this is that dogs have been evolving alongside humans for many thousands of years. Did someone tell all those people way back in the dog's history not to have nurturing feelings towards their canine pals? My belief is that to some extent dogs and humans have co-evolved. There was a study Cressida might be able to point you to that suggested that domestic dogs were better at reading human signals than they really have any right to be. That's not to say we can treat them like babies, because I really hate seeing that and it does dogs no good, but it is to suggest that perhaps we can afford to relax when it comes to empathising. Perhaps our feelings are not lost on the dog when offered at appropriate times. Excuse the bold type, I just feel like that's going to be completely overlooked otherwise.

Espencer, I already said why I don't think my behaviour nurtures fear and anxiety in my dog. Because the frequency of the behaviour I 'nurture' with cuddles and sympathy has not increased in frequency, or broadened in usage. She still only looks for comfort when something is very wrong. She's a tough little thing because she grew up with a tough teenaged girl. When she fell down, she got right back up again and raced off for more fun, just like I did, and still do. But when she's very hurt, sometimes she just wants a cuddle and some quiet words from me, just like I do when I'm hurt. Is offering that comfort spoiling?

ORIGINAL: Angelique

ORIGINAL: espencer

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

I completely agree with you...and I am a girl. []

"Nurturing" is part of female "psychology". Study any social mammal group, and you will see this. Nurturing is very self rewarding to the female nature. This includes the feeding (nursing) of the very young. Yet, the mothers in the wild also teach the young ones social boundaries at the same time.

I've seen plenty of spoiled little "mommy's darlings" dogs, to know when displaced female nurturing has gone very wrong and created a spoiled brat.

Men are not exempt from spoiling dogs, but it seems to come from a different place. I man will indulge his emotions and feel comfortable with a dog, while ignoring his wife, because a dog is not as emotionally draining as a human relationship. Not neccessarily "heathy" either, but just as understandable as where females tend to mess up based on their own "gender" programming.

Human empathy can sometimes crossover into an "over-nurturing" relm with women when their dogs become their little psuedo-children (fur babies) and they begin self-fullfilling their nurturing needs.

Empathy in the relm of self-fulfillment and the projections of human emotions upon dogs may be self-rewarding for the humans, but honoring another species, is to treat them and respect them as the species they were designed by nature to be, understanding them, and fulfilling their needs, first.

In a dog's mind, the lending of comfort may simply be seen as a behavior by a nervous, unstable packmember (who is reinforcing by there own behavior) that there is something in the current situation to fear, and by their actions convey to the dog they they are looking for comfort, rather than lending it.

Our comforting  and epathetic behaviors are sometimes lost on a dog and do the opposite of lend comfort.

IMO

I have to whole-heartedly agree with this.  Coddling a frightened dog is NOT doing the dog any favors, it really, really isn't.  I ahve read just about every piece of literature on fearful dogs that I can get my hands on and EVERY single one has underscored the improtance of not comforting a fearful dog.  A frightened dog is not a crying baby.

ORIGINAL: sillysally



I have to whole-heartedly agree with this.  Coddling a frightened dog is NOT doing the dog any favors, it really, really isn't.  I ahve read just about every piece of literature on fearful dogs that I can get my hands on and EVERY single one has underscored the improtance of not comforting a fearful dog.  A frightened dog is not a crying baby.

Why is it so hard to get across the idea that I am NOT encouraging people to coddle their dogs when they are frightened? I'm encouraging people to listen to their dogs and consider that sometimes comfort is what a dog needs. NEVER coddling, just comfort. There is a difference. Just quiet, calm comfort.

When my dog is frightened of something, she scratches at the door of the laundry where she sleeps. I let her out and allow her to find a place to sleep that makes her feel comfortable and less afraid. Usually, that's close by me, I guess because, somehow, despite everything wrong I apparently do, she trusts me and feels safer with me than on her own. I have no problem with this. I make a place for her and leave her to settle. No coddling, no comfort, just provide her with what she perceives as safety. In fact, as soon as she's settled I ignore her. Her fear is easier managed this way than stamped out.

Sometimes, she feels sooky and anxious because I've been away for a few days or something. She scratches on the door and I let her out, thinking she's frightened. She tells me with her body language that she is not really frightened, just wants to hang out with me. I send her back to bed. The rule is that she's only allowed out if she's frightened. She knows this and plods on back to bed at my stern suggestion. If I send her back mistakenly, she scratches at the door again, if I send her back correctly, she doesn't. I know when I'm right and when I'm wrong because her fear is predictable, even though sometimes she's triggered early enough that I can't hear the thunder or fireworks until a little while later.

And then, once in a while, as I've described, something is seriously wrong and she tells me she wants a reassuring cuddle. I give her one. We share her feelings, I learn what ails her. Immediately, she seems relieved. I treat her. If I can't treat it, I offer her the only thing I can, which is physical comfort. I'm not talking wailing or sobbing as I crush her to my bosom. Just quiet, calming strokes and soothing words.

My point is, I adjust my response to what she tells me. I'm not ruled by the idea that all fear and anxiety is the same behaviour and requires the same response. I might be wrong in my belief that seemingly similar behaviours are different and require flexibility, but it doesn't seem to be doing my dog any harm to treat them differently, and it encourages me to better understand her signals. I was taught that when it comes to animal behaviour, it's always best to note as much detail as possible, because grouping things together just because they seem like the same thing is more grievous as an error than finding yourself with too much detail.