Rus Articles Journal

Your dog - and feels that she sees. The American professor of psychology suggests to forget the world from the point of view of a dog of

about everything that we know about dogs, - and to pass to their point of view. Will benefit our communication with the pet from it. Mentally it was simpler to turn in chetverony, the expert in behavior of animals in passing “gets into a skin“ the broiler and a tick.

in the Morning I awake with

the Pumpernickel. She approaches my bed and begins to sniff vigorously: her nose in several millimeters from my person, moustaches tickle lips. She wishes to know whether woke up I, whether she is living... whether also I it in general. In completion the Pumpernickel expressively sneezes to me directly in a face. I open eyes, and she looks at me, smiling and puffing as a sign of a greeting.

Look at

on the dog. Perhaps, it lies now nearby, on a laying, having been curtailed and having put a muzzle on paws, or collapsed on a tiled floor, pulling paws in a dream. Of course, I do not demand that you immediately forgot a nickname, a favourite delicacy or unique shape of your dog, without speaking already about all the rest. It is like to ask the person who for the first time is engaged in meditation, instantly to reach an enlightenment.

Having looked at dogs from the point of view of science, we will see that which - what of our information about them are absolutely inexact; some things seeming it is infallible true, by close examination are doubtful. And if to look at our dogs from other point of view - from the point of view of a dog, - that we will notice nuances of which people usually do not think. Therefore the best way to begin comprehension of the dog nature is to forget that we as it seems to us, know about it.

First what it is necessary to leave, is an anthropomorphism, likening of animals to the person. We see, we estimate and we try to foresee behavior of a dog with biased, human, the points of view, allocating it with own lines. Well of course, dogs love and long, think and dream ; they know and understand us, and also miss, are jealous and become despondent . If the dog sufferingly looks at us when we leave the house for the whole day, then first of all she will come to our mind that she is grieved.

the Anthropomorphism is not that inadmissible

. It arose when people began to comprehend the world. Our ancestors constantly resorted to this reception to explain and foresee behavior of animals - what they hunted, and that which, in turn, hunted them. Imagine to yourself a meeting with an ognennoglazy jaguar in a wood twilight; you fixedly look to it in the face and, perhaps, think: “If I was a jaguar...“ . And - you bolt from a wild cat at full speed. People survived: probably, the anthropomorphism was sufficiently true.

Now we, as a rule, do not fall into a state of the victim which to escape from a jaguar, should present what that wants. Instead we take animals to ourselves to the house and we suggest them to become family members. In this case the anthropomorphism does not help us to build up the equal and emotionally rich relationship with animals at all. I do not want to tell that anthropomorphous judgments are always false: it is not excluded that the dog really longs, is jealous, shows curiosity and becomes despondent - but, maybe, she only asks a sandwich with peanut butter.

We can consider by

an animal happy if we see that corners of his mouth are raised - and, most likely, we will be mistaken. Dolphins, for example, “smile“ all the time, it is invariable line of their shape as the grimace drawn on a face of the clown. The grin of a chimpanzee demonstrates fear or expresses humility - both that, and another is very far from pleasure. The raised eyebrows of a capuchin monkey say at all not that she is surprised, doubts or is alarmed: she lets know to relatives that it has friendly intentions. And at baboons the raised eyebrows, on the contrary, can mean threat (therefore you watch the mimicry in the presence of monkeys). People should confirm or disprove what we attribute to animals.

When to us it seems to

that we know how it will be better for an animal (proceeding from idea of how it will be better for us), we can be unintentionally in a conflict with own purposes. In recent years people attended to a condition of animals whom grow up on slaughter, for example, broiler chickens, and decided, what will be better, if birds are able to leave cages and to warm up wings.

But whether freedom broilers want? In the standard opinion, any being, be it the person or an animal, does not love narrowness. (Really if you have to choose between the subway car to the full filled with the got wet, excited people, and the car where it is not enough people you, certainly, will prefer the second option - if, of course, in this car the conditioner is not broken or, say, exclusively badly the smelling passenger does not go there.) The natural behavior of chickens, however, testifies to the return. They get off in a flock, but do not wander in itself.

Biologists made simple experiment to reveal preferences of chickens: they chose several, caged and began to watch them. The majority of chickens pressed close to the relatives, but did not walk even if in a cage there was a free space. In other words, broilers prefer the crowded car to empty.

I do not mean

Ya at all that chickens like to live in crowded conditions. To inhumanely cage so many chickens that they cannot move. However it is not enough assumption of coincidence of our preferences to preferences of chickens to decide as if we know what they want. Chickens on poultry farm are killed when they reach age of one and a half months. Poultry still is in this age on care of a brood hen. The broilers deprived of an opportunity to hide under a maternal wing keep closely to each other.

Take

my raincoat, please

Really we, with our love to an anthropomorphism, we are mistaken also about dogs? Yes. we Will take, for example, clothes for dogs with four sleeves. Many owners of dogs noticed that their pets reluctantly go outside during bad weather, and drew a conclusion: dogs do not love a rain.

What it means? To a dog, has to be, it is not pleasant when the rain wets her, in the same way as it is not loved by us. Whether but truth it? The dog is excited, she wags a tail when you get a raincoat from a case? You do not hurry to triumph: can be, she just understands that emergence of a raincoat foretells long-awaited walk. The dog spins, puts the tail between the legs and twists the head when you put on it a raincoat? It discourages you, however you do not hurry to doubt the correctness. How the dog when gets wet looks? It is dirty? And at the same time with delight shakes off? It is unclear.

the Natural behavior of wild representatives of family of canids can help to answer with

a question that the dog thinks of a raincoat. Both dogs, and at wolves have “raincoat“ which is the integral accessory of an animal, - wool. It is quite enough; when it starts to rain, wolves look for shelter, but do not try to build the improvised plashchik.

Besides, the clothes for dogs fit a back, a breast tightly, and sometimes and the head of an animal. The wolf is under pressure upon these parts of the body when other wolf approves over it the power or the senior relative “punishes“ him for disobedience. The dominating individuals often press subordinates to the earth, having taken jaws their muzzle. This so-called educational pokusyvaniye, and, is possible for this reason dogs in muzzles seem unusually obedient.

the Dog who presses the relative to the earth, - dominants and the subordinated dog in a similar case is under inevitable pressure. Possibly, just this feeling also causes a raincoat. Therefore the main feeling which the dog when wearing a raincoat has, - at all not security from moisture. More likely, the raincoat instills in it confidence that nearby there is an individual of higher rank. The dog dressed in a raincoat can obediently go outside, but not because she likes to wear it but because imposed it the subordinated role. Certainly, as a result she will not get wet, but it worries us, but not a dog.

to avoid such mistakes, it is necessary not to “humanize“ a dog, and it is correct to interpret her behavior. In most cases everything is simple: the owner has to ask a dog what she wants. It is only necessary to know how to translate the answer.

the World from the point of view of a tick

the German biologist Jacob von Ixkuel at the beginning of the XX century made a big contribution to studying of animals. He offered persons interested to study animal life at first to reconstruct his umvelt (German of Umwelt ) - a subjective picture of the world.

to

For example, present a tiny chernonogy tick. Those from you who at least once attentively examined a body of a dog in search of a being of the size of a pin head probably already it presented. And, most likely, are not inclined to stand on ceremony with it. Von Ixkuel, unlike you, tried to understand in what world there lives a tick.

Short reference: ixodic pincers to which chernonogy belong it is animals of a class arachnoid. They are parasites. They have a simple trunk, helitser (special oral appendages) and, as a rule, four pairs of legs. Thousands of generations of pincers were born, copulated, got food and died. They are born without legs and genitals, but soon get these parts of a body, copulate and clamber above - for example, on a blade. From this point something surprising begins.

From all images, sounds and smells of world around of an adult tick only one interests. He does not look around - pincers are blind. Sounds do not disturb him too - they have no relation to business. The tick waits for emergence of a smell of oleic (butane) acid which means approach of a warm-blooded animal (we can catch a smell of this acid, for example, in a sweat smell). The tick is capable to be waiting in the wings dozens of years.

As soon as he will scent the necessary smell, it falls from a perch. At it secondary touch ability joins. The surface of a body of a tick is photosensitive and reacts to heat. If to a tick carries and the tasty smell really belongs to an animal, he sticks and sucks blood. After single feeding he falls off, lays eggs and dies.

Thus, the world of a tick strikingly differs from ours. For a tick only the smell and heat matter. If we want to understand how there lives any of living beings, follows us, in - the first, to learn what matters for it. How? The main way - to understand, that the animal is capable to perceive: what it sees, hears, feels and so on. Only the perceived objects - the others an animal matter or just does not notice, or does not distinguish them. Wind which rustles in a grass for a tick is senseless. Sounds of children`s picnic? The tick does not hear them. Crumbs of tasty pie on the earth? The tick is indifferent to them.

In - the second, to us it is necessary to learn how the animal acts. The tick copulates, waits, clings and eats. Therefore the world consists for it of pincers and not - pincers; from objects on which it is possible to sit and on which it is impossible to sit; from surfaces to which it is possible to cling and to which it is impossible to cling; from substances which can eat and which cannot eat.

by

These two components - sensory perception and behavior - generally determine a picture of the world of any living being. At each animal umvelt , subjective reality.

Different animals differently see (or, more precisely, perceive - some of them see badly or in general are blind) the same object. The rose is a rose. Or not? For the person the rose is one of kinds of flowers, a usual gift of lovers, something very beautiful. For a bug the rose is an extensive territory where it is possible to hide (for example, from a leaf wrong side not to catch sight to a bird), to hunt (in an anthodium where there are larvae of ants) and to lay eggs (in knot - the place of an attachment of a leaf to a stalk). For an elephant the rose is a prickle under legs.

A what is a rose for a dog? As we will see, having understood a structure of a body and brain of a dog, a rose for it - not a beautiful subject and not closed world. The rose is indistinguishable from other plants surrounding a dog - unless on it the dog urinated or there came other animal, or the flower is held in hand by the owner. Then the rose causes a keen interest and becomes for a dog a subject much more significant, than for us.

the Termination follows

...

From the book “Dog from a Nose to a Tail“