Yes I agree having them throughout my life.
There weed 3 significant digs in my life, a large sheepherder, a breed escapes me but will look it up, a very big dog, and then Irish Setters occupying my consciousness in adilescence, and lately a dog which acquired a bad reputation: a breed I seem to forget, but will fill in later.
The fact is and the idea i am trying to entertain, is, that digs do ‘think’ but in a way that doesen’t require then to form non instinctive markers very much removed from immediate set borders of existential concerns of survival
They cannot relate to other dogs in terms other than sexual coupling or the care and safety of offspring.
Secondarily, their relation to their owners relates to their own survival, and granted in and through Pavlovian conditioned education.
So as a refrain, digs manage to relate through mode general, cuws of signals, through basic signs of effect.
Their affected responses are merely that slippery slope between effect and affect, that escapes dineation.
Masters imbue an anoulmous sense of non-deciphefable uncertainty between effect and affect, as if animals suffered from somilad confusions.
Why the disparity between man and animal?
Why would the dog expect less then man?
That’s good, and i hazard that dog somehow appreciated it’s subssr giant condition.It never realizes conditioning via reward as a ‘condition’ of it’s existence, whereas human beings have nit yet realized that his masters can emulate the same.