Malt 379 Posted January 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Of course it is, the clue is in the word 'prey', is it not? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Casso 1,264 Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 There is a difference between prey instinct and drive. , a protection doesn't want to eat the sleeve , a collie doesn't want to eat the sheep , and the terrier the fox,, the bomb detection dog has no intention of eating the bomb but he too is in drive , 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Outlaw Pete 2,224 Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 I can recommend a book called "In Defence Of Dogs...why dogs need our understanding" by John Bradshaw. Thanks for the recommendation. It's now on my Kindle Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted January 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 There is a difference between prey instinct and drive. , a protection doesn't want to eat the sleeve , a collie doesn't want to eat the sheep , and the terrier the fox,, the bomb detection dog has no intention of eating the bomb but he too is in drive , Yes but we are not talking about today's modern breeds that have their drive harnessed and put to use for specific purposes, we are talking about wolves and the ancestors of the modern dog.. You say that a sheepdog doesn't wan to eat a sheep, but the drive that humans have harnessed in that bred originated as a biological need for the wolf ancestors of that sheepdog to eat and therefore survive. Thing you have to remember when talking about behavioural psychology is that it's all about a theory that fits the facts and there are many theories out there, none can be proved to be the conclusive and correct one. Me personally I believe that all animal behaviour has it's roots in the biological needs and processes that drive an organism, humans included. I think Freud and his psychoanalysis stuff is a load of rubbish going on what I've read of it, but again it is a theory that fits around the same facts as the other theories so can't be discounted. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nik_B 3,791 Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 The domestication of wolves started somewhere between 19,000 and 32,000 years ago. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Casso 1,264 Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 There is a difference between prey instinct and drive. , a protection doesn't want to eat the sleeve , a collie doesn't want to eat the sheep , and the terrier the fox,, the bomb detection dog has no intention of eating the bomb but he too is in drive , Yes but we are not talking about today's modern breeds that have their drive harnessed and put to use for specific purposes, we are talking about wolves and the ancestors of the modern dog.. You say that a sheepdog doesn't wan to eat a sheep, but the drive that humans have harnessed in that bred originated as a biological need for the wolf ancestors of that sheepdog to eat and therefore survive. Thing you have to remember when talking about behavioural psychology is that it's all about a theory that fits the facts and there are many theories out there, none can be proved to be the conclusive and correct one. Me personally I believe that all animal behaviour has it's roots in the biological needs and processes that drive an organism, humans included. I think Freud and his psychoanalysis stuff is a load of rubbish going on what I've read of it, but again it is a theory that fits around the same facts as the other theories so can't be discounted. It's funny Malt but I think a lot of Freud stuff is very reverent to dogs , Now that we accept that drive is very relevant to the human /dog connection , it's makes that relationship unique and far beyond anything we will ever witness between 2 species and the reason it sustains is because of drive , food alone will reach a certain attachment , you fulfil his drive and you will have an animal that will lay down his life for you , no other animal will ever come near, try getting a domestic fox to guard the house for ya, all instinct and no drive, Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,955 Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Casso you've just confused the shite out of me. I'm not clear on exactly what you are saying... I understand the drive/food point you're making but not sure how that is relevant to domesticating a wild wolf? If wolves didn't domesticate through the mutual benefit of working together to fill bellies, why did they? Basically, how do you think it happened? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted January 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 There is a difference between prey instinct and drive. , a protection doesn't want to eat the sleeve , a collie doesn't want to eat the sheep , and the terrier the fox,, the bomb detection dog has no intention of eating the bomb but he too is in drive , Yes but we are not talking about today's modern breeds that have their drive harnessed and put to use for specific purposes, we are talking about wolves and the ancestors of the modern dog.. You say that a sheepdog doesn't wan to eat a sheep, but the drive that humans have harnessed in that bred originated as a biological need for the wolf ancestors of that sheepdog to eat and therefore survive. Thing you have to remember when talking about behavioural psychology is that it's all about a theory that fits the facts and there are many theories out there, none can be proved to be the conclusive and correct one. Me personally I believe that all animal behaviour has it's roots in the biological needs and processes that drive an organism, humans included. I think Freud and his psychoanalysis stuff is a load of rubbish going on what I've read of it, but again it is a theory that fits around the same facts as the other theories so can't be discounted. It's funny Malt but I think a lot of Freud stuff is very reverent to dogs , Now that we accept that drive is very relevant to the human /dog connection , it's makes that relationship unique and far beyond anything we will ever witness between 2 species and the reason it sustains is because of drive , food alone will reach a certain attachment , you fulfil his drive and you will have an animal that will lay down his life for you , no other animal will ever come near, try getting a domestic fox to guard the house for ya, all instinct and no drive, As we've already said, foxes are not social animals so have very little to no instinct to protect their surroundings and fellow pack members like wolves/dogs do. Again, the reason wolves and other carnivorous pack animals started to live in packs in the first place is because the world changed, open spaces started to appear and the prey they evolved alongside got bigger as a result. It was beneficial for them to hunt alongside others instead of individually with a big enough reward to share per kill. The red fox evolved as a specialist mouse/small prey hunter, therefore it was more beneficial to remain a solitary animal and compete with others over smaller prey with less of a reward per energy expended per kill.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Casso 1,264 Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Casso you've just confused the shite out of me. I'm not clear on exactly what you are saying... I understand the drive/food point you're making but not sure how that is relevant to domesticating a wild wolf? If wolves didn't domesticate through the mutual benefit of working together to fill bellies, why did they? Basically, how do you think it happened? The working together to achieve a goal is exactly what I'm talking about , the same thing as you and your dog ,if you could give your dog a choice between going out with you or a pot of food which would it choice? food of course may be the end result but the same as an ancient breed like the saluki becoming social thru the hunt, I believe it's the physical act of the hunt that made a difference , it's no wonder that the hundreds of breeds around today have hound as a surname , it's the working in tandem with man to overcome resistance in the form of a prey animal that truly copper sealed domestication , and this site is living proof of it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,955 Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 I get ya now. That's provoked a bit of thought at least. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mushroom 14,162 Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 The domestication of wolves started somewhere between 19,000 and 32,000 years ago. I'm pretty certain they have found evidence much earlier than that in Northern siberia Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted January 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 Casso you've just confused the shite out of me. I'm not clear on exactly what you are saying... I understand the drive/food point you're making but not sure how that is relevant to domesticating a wild wolf? If wolves didn't domesticate through the mutual benefit of working together to fill bellies, why did they? Basically, how do you think it happened? The working together to achieve a goal is exactly what I'm talking about , the same thing as you and your dog ,if you could give your dog a choice between going out with you or a pot of food which would it choice? food of course may be the end result but the same as an ancient breed like the saluki becoming social thru the hunt, I believe it's the physical act of the hunt that made a difference , it's no wonder that the hundreds of breeds around today have hound as a surname , it's the working in tandem with man to overcome resistance in the form of a prey animal that truly copper sealed domestication , and this site is living proof of it Your dog will likely never be that hungry that it would turn down a chance to go out with you, but would you expect that same dog to turn down a bowl of food and come out if it hadn't been fed for a few days? You wouldn't expect a pack of hungry wolves to leave a fresh carcass and go off hunting with the alpha male on a whim.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Casso 1,264 Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 There is a difference between prey instinct and drive. , a protection doesn't want to eat the sleeve , a collie doesn't want to eat the sheep , and the terrier the fox,, the bomb detection dog has no intention of eating the bomb but he too is in drive , Yes but we are not talking about today's modern breeds that have their drive harnessed and put to use for specific purposes, we are talking about wolves and the ancestors of the modern dog.. You say that a sheepdog doesn't wan to eat a sheep, but the drive that humans have harnessed in that bred originated as a biological need for the wolf ancestors of that sheepdog to eat and therefore survive. Thing you have to remember when talking about behavioural psychology is that it's all about a theory that fits the facts and there are many theories out there, none can be proved to be the conclusive and correct one. Me personally I believe that all animal behaviour has it's roots in the biological needs and processes that drive an organism, humans included. I think Freud and his psychoanalysis stuff is a load of rubbish going on what I've read of it, but again it is a theory that fits around the same facts as the other theories so can't be discounted. It's funny Malt but I think a lot of Freud stuff is very reverent to dogs , Now that we accept that drive is very relevant to the human /dog connection , it's makes that relationship unique and far beyond anything we will ever witness between 2 species and the reason it sustains is because of drive , food alone will reach a certain attachment , you fulfil his drive and you will have an animal that will lay down his life for you , no other animal will ever come near, try getting a domestic fox to guard the house for ya, all instinct and no drive, As we've already said, foxes are not social animals so have very little to no instinct to protect their surroundings and fellow pack members like wolves/dogs do. Again, the reason wolves and other carnivorous pack animals started to live in packs in the first place is because the world changed, open spaces started to appear and the prey they evolved alongside got bigger as a result. It was beneficial for them to hunt alongside others instead of individually with a big enough reward to share per kill. The red fox evolved as a specialist mouse/small prey hunter, therefore it was more beneficial to remain a solitary animal and compete with others over smaller prey with less of a reward per energy expended per kill.. Yeah wolves live in packs to overcome resistance in the form of large animals , therefore making them extremely social , foxes do not , no fox that will ever be domesticated will ever hunt in tandem with man like a dog , the point I'm making is that social makeup of the wolf makes the human dog relationship and completely different than the fox experiment , and it's because of drive not food Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted January 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 It's different, but it can be used in the same way rats and mice can be used in experiments regarding human research. It's not the animal that is particularly important, it is the changes that take place with regards to it's behaviour. as regards to foxes hunting in tandem with humans, I'll pinch this from another thread: When I was a kid my dads mate had two pet red foxes. They lived in a kennel and run, came out off lead and did some basic commands. And was there not a rat catcher that used two foxes in Victorian times? John Gaunt. Died in 1924 age 73. Worked on the railways as a rat catcher and used foxes amoungst his terriers to catch the rats with. http://www.picturethepast.org.uk/frontend.php?keywords=Ref_No_increment;EQUALS;DCAV001501&pos=14&action=zoom&id=1500 TC Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Casso 1,264 Posted January 13, 2014 Report Share Posted January 13, 2014 (edited) It's different, but it can be used in the same way rats and mice can be used in experiments regarding human research. It's not the animal that is particularly important, it is the changes that take place with regards to it's behaviour. as regards to foxes hunting in tandem with humans, I'll pinch this from another thread: When I was a kid my dads mate had two pet red foxes. They lived in a kennel and run, came out off lead and did some basic commands. And was there not a rat catcher that used two foxes in Victorian times? John Gaunt. Died in 1924 age 73. Worked on the railways as a rat catcher and used foxes amoungst his terriers to catch the rats with. http://www.picturethepast.org.uk/frontend.php?keywords=Ref_No_increment;EQUALS;DCAV001501&pos=14&action=zoom&id=1500 TC There's some great shots there , what you seeing is still instinctive fox behaviour, there is no drive involved, it's not doing anything a fox in the wild can't do only difference is it's raised by man, I had a ferret once could catch mice with me but both fox and ferret will never be able to go beyond with is basic to their nature because when push comes to shove they will just revert back to instinctive behaviour , because they cant go by feel which is what makes a dog a dog Edited January 13, 2014 by Casso Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.