Anybody read Dr. Helen's piece cited in Frank's post, particularly the comments below it? I've been thinking (and yes, I know, it is a dangerous activity); but, in the original item, the top one in Frank's citation, the guy says what distinguishes human beings from those in the animal kingdom is creativity (among other things).Is this true, in verifiable terms? I've had two dogs, one named Mc, one name Lu; but, IMO, both were very creative, especially when it came to ways to get at food, astonishingly so. And, those stories of lost pets travelling thousands of kilometers to return to their owners? That requires creativity, IMO.Plus, bottom line, pets experience guilt; I know this for a fact; and, they know when they're in trouble (which means, in my experience, Lu would be extra loving and attention-seeking to divert my attention from something she had done she knew she was not to do).Example? She loved going through the kitchen trash; and, after eleven years, would still find creative ways to open the cupboard door beneath the kitchen sink in order to get at it (if I left her alone in the house for a couple of hours).And, when I would arrive home, she would be her most lickative and lovable, kinda almost blocking me from making it to the kitchen; and then, when I did finally get there and discovered she'd slurped-to-pieces the butter wrapper or whatevs, she'd be right around the corner and would keep her distance; but, stick her nose around it to see if I'd discovered what she'd done and when she knew I had, she'd beeline it for her little daybed and pretend to be asleep. It was a game, for her (and, isn't play "creative")?It was just too cute, too cute for me to do anything but say, "Aw, Princess Lutitious, feeling a little ignored today, is she?"And, she would sulk (if I had to go anywhere for more than a couple hours; and, when I returned home, she would play hard to get and glare at me. No, I wasn't projecting, I'm an introjecting type.)So, I think the top link errs, a little, when it comes to IQ and animals; she wasn't smarter than the average bear for nuthin' . . .Lu also had EQ, IMO; she knew when I was talking about her or food because I had to spell it out; and, I had to change the spelling or word because, after a while, she'd figured out what it was I was spelling; as well, it takes both to manipulate her dawg (er, that would be me since, I was always telling her, "You're the dawg, I'm the owner," especially at Timmeh, when the helpful drive-through peeps wanted to give her a TimBit and she was at the driver-side truck window before I could stop them (even though she had an allergy to yeast). She only weighed eighteen pounds, too; but, she was smart (and, very creative when it came to getting her way).She also shook when I took the road leading to the vet, she knew she was getting her monthly allergy shot and would give me *that* look; like, why this torture, today, of all the greatdawgdays?Also, please note I didn't make the monkey, typewriter, Shakespeare joke :).
I used to drive my first father-in-law to distraction by insisting to him that my dog, Toby, was smarter than he was, since Toby understood some English, but my father-in-law understand "Dog" at all.
Hehe . . .I hear you, Frank; no kidding. I'm surprised you stood up to him; you're brave (or bigger than he was). But, you certainly prove my point; and, I agree with you. I know many lovely dogs; I can count fine human beings I know and love on one foot.I think your first paw-in-law oughtta meet my X-IT's maw-maw; I'd say they'd make a good pair (and, won't say "of dogs" because, from where I'm barking, it would be an insult to dawgs). Even better if he hails from Russia or the Ukraine, near Chernobyl (sp?).Dogs aren't related to Hyenae, are they? K. That'll do. Hyrenae (which sounds like Erinyae whom you'd know), immortalised in River as Agave (and, she makes Ag. look great :)). Wait, don't tell me: From what I know of Deb and so, you fared much better next time? Good on / for you.(BTW, not a peep-squeak from U know who . . ..)