Do dogs know how to love? The affirmative answer to this question cost me some followers on Twitter; I was forced to block them after the discussion had taken on too bright a tone.
I was surprised that these people felt compelled to continue to advocate the absurd thesis that dogs cannot love. Given that I usually recognize the limits of what I love (see for example the article Running hurts?), which also brings me the reproaches of those who do not see these limits because they are in love lost, I find that there is a borderline behavior in those who insist on recognizing an absurd anthropocentrism, the primacy of man to hold this or that. Basically, it is a primacy of the race, similar to those who support discrimination in this or that sense. A behavior psychologically very doubtful, dangerous.
In order to support their thesis, the anti-cinephiles have gone as far as to make easily contestable statements; however, it is interesting to summarize the most significant ones.
Dogs can’t think and can’t reason, how do we think they can love?
Given that a dog thinks and thinks at least like a child of a few years (who loves his mother), a balanced person knows that love is demonstrated through actions, not through words or reasoning. And the actions of many dogs unequivocally demonstrate that they know how to love. To say that dogs do not know how to love means that you are not able to see their actions and that therefore you have major problems in assessing reality, often passed through the lens of their own prejudices.
The dog derives from the wolf and was chosen by man for his loyalty, but remains an animal.
Even man derives from the monkey, so with similar logic should not know how to love. How did man evolve, why deny that even the dog has not undergone an evolution and has not learned to love?
If we really want to call love of dogs, it is trivial to show that it is not the same as the “human” one: it is enough to consider dogs very fond of people who are misfit, obvious waste of society that are not loved by anyone and that often do not know how to love people.
This example is simply astounding! Applying the same logic, it is enough to consider men and women who bind themselves to what are defined as “waste of society” (drug addicts, criminals, tramps, etc..) to conclude that even the man does not know how to love. Moreover, I consider the expression “misfits, blatant rejection of society that are not loved by anyone” a clear example of moral meanness, so I doubt that those who use it really know how to love.
So what is the balanced position? During my last stay in France, in the lobby of the hotel I came across a parent with a child in tow, who, at the sight of my two dogs, is unbuttoned in a “keep them”…. (they were on a leash). The child was terrified showing that the parent was a terrible parent: never pass on their fears to the children, in fact you pass them a handicap.
An example of how, in fact, it is impossible to ignore the relationship with dogs. Therefore, a small vademecum is useful.
- There are good dogs and bad dogs, just like humans. There is no point in demonising or divinising them all.
- It is not necessary to appreciate dogs and even less to possess one, but one should not even consider them inferior beings to be ghettoised.
- Dogs know how to love, so they can improve our lives.
- So, as you choose a partner, you must choose a dog that is compatible with us and that can improve our lives.
- If you decide to have a dog, you must love it, giving it time and not minimal spaces. If you can’t do that, it’s better to give up on your intention to own a four-legged friend.
- So it is useless to think that one dog is worth the other; each breed has its own specific characteristics.
- The owner of a dog must respect the rights of others.
- Therefore, he must prevent the dog from bothering or getting dirty.
- In particular, dog owners of potentially dangerous breeds cannot expect others to accept their dog if it is not perfectly under the owner’s control.
- Those who are afraid of all dogs cannot expect their problem to become a problem for those who are not to blame.