Natasha Tori Maru

I never claimed this, though.

I think dogs can pattern match sequences. They can observe and know or guess what might occur next. My pup will know it is time to leave the house in the morning based on a sequence of sounds I make. There are cognitive processes involved in being able to do the above: associative learning (sound cues), sequential pattern recognition (she will only motion to go when things happen in a rough order, instead of all events being independent), anticipation (predictive processing I think it is called) and generalisation (the sounds I make might change a bit, but the overall pattern signals we are leaving). I think this implies a "thinking" although it might not be anything like we experience thinking to be. Much less distinct from feeling. Perhaps one big soup.

I don't think there is a way for us to test this - is there an experiment you could construct that could give some more data? Even when we scan peoples brains for regional associations, the scans can vary by a substantial portion. Do you think it is our language that creates this division between object <-> feeling ? Maybe the distinction we're attempting to investigate is partly an artefact of our own conceptual and linguistic framework? Sometimes how we think about things is literally formed in how we compress or expand on language. As an example of how language can compress observation, interpretation, needs, feelings and thoughts: You're always dismissing what I say. You never actually listen, and it's becoming really frustrating. When I was explaining my perspective and you interrupted me several times, I felt frustrated because I need to feel heard and have my perspective considered. Would you be willing to let me finish before responding? The above marked in red contains observation, interpretation, needs, feelings and thoughts. So does the blue - but it is the uncompressed version illustrating all these elements concretely. The abstraction alters our perception dramatically (think about how these two phrases would be received). In this way the language we use might a distinction that isn't even there - well, it isn't there is it? huehuehuehue emptiness/nothingness/absolutetruth I digress - got sidetracked with language possibly altering perception

Obviously

I mean... I could argue this might be true of humans also. Looking at people from this frame could apply - we tend to assess and make distinctions around objects based on function. The function of a thing has a value assigned, and that value is based on our feelings, emotions and preferences. We humans might just be exceptional at abstracting away from this core fact (that most assessments are emotional in nature, maybe all).

What? There are some individuals that claim animals cannot be traumatized on the grounds they do not have the level of consciousness humans operate from.

Regarding picking up on "vibe" - dogs can get this wrong if there is a pathology present. And yes, dogs can be traumatised. Animals can suffer from trauma. Regarding the OP: Are you asking if dogs experience something through an emotion, or experience the thing as an emotion?

No amount of explanation is going to mean we will tolerate women being equated to chickens and deserving violence.

Consent isn't a hard concept. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DeCCt7GKL1W/?dlrf=amZhc25xNTltem0y

@Olaf It makes me happy (⁠◍⁠•⁠ᴗ⁠•⁠◍⁠)⁠❤

@integral oh! Massively appreciate your words! Isn't it great when you finally put a face to words? It's a totally different experience 🥰 Doggo is spoilt as hell. It was an hour of ball and running right after I got off the call. I have a shitload going on in life, but all she has is me.

Well fucken said

Thank you 🙏🏻 The understanding & exploration of different perspectives is not the issue. Calling woman animals that deserve violence and equating them to chickens IS the issue. Don't confuse the two things. We already have an issue with women feeling unwelcome, crushing out femininity and feminine expression from the forum. This contributes to that. Statements like the above cause me to hide my own feminine expression here. I can't possibly imagine what it might do to women who aren't as prickly.

@Majed it's not about sophistication. Don't try to justify selfishness in this way. Violating another person's consent is wrong.

@Majed your mixing up relative vs absolute perspectives.