I disagree that it's "stupid" ... Wise.Originally Posted by Wise
I do agree that it is an intense reaction to the stress of confinement, however.
Re-read what I said.
Jack
I disagree that it's "stupid" ... Wise.
I do agree that it is an intense reaction to the stress of confinement, however.
Re-read what I said.
Jack
Just to add a punctuation mark:
If you decided to tie 2 people up to a chain by the neck, which one do you think would be the best overall fighter and human being?
1) The guy who sat there, dull-eyed and docile, never understanding why he couldn't go anywhere, and who never tried to get off the chain?;
or
2) The guy who knew that chain was holding him back, and who yanked all-day, all-night at the chain ... trying to break it any way he could ... never stopping in his effort to destroy that chain and get off it?
Which guy do you call "stupid" ... and which guy do you think has more "spirit"?
To me, some dogmen show that they don't really know much about dogs at all ... or much else for that matter.
Jack
We've seen "intelligence" tied to gameness and ability, numerous times. MANY folks here agree with that.
In your example above, I would believe the MORE INTELLIGENT human is the one that knows, he cannot escaped a chain around his neck,,,,,,not by his own abilities anyways.
Just basing my opinion on the information given and not any assumptions.
So you're saying the gamest, most intelligent men in Alcatraz prison were the ones who "knew" they couldn't escape ... and sat around accepting their fate ... rather than the few who relentlessly tried and finally figured out how to do so?
I absolutely disagree.
I guess you think the gamest, smartest dog are also the ones who "know they can't win" ... and stop trying too? Again, I absolutely disagree.
The gamest, smartest ones are the ones who never stop trying and always figure some "way" to do what they want to do.
I won't compare human intelligence to that of a dog. There have been studies and theories, but bottom line, it is all educated guessing. I mean, why are we breeding them, and caring for them, if they are as intelligent as us, they'd take care of those basics things themselves. That's what they do in the wild, humans have stepped in to harness what they are selecting for.
Jack, I never saw Robert T, heard about the dog, but if he was really that bad M'fer, and had the nasty habits, which I have stated that I personally do not like. I would not breed to that dog. (mangy feet are no issue, that can be cured) There are other bad M'fers I'd be selecting for. Ones that don't destroy everything, I agree it is cunning sometimes the things these dogs do to their environment.
But I would be selecting dogs that are cunning when it counts, when faced with a real problem and ones that think on their feet in a jam. Those are the truly special animals in my book.
Again, it's hard to keep a discussion on track with you, because you say things that were never said.
I never said dogs were "as intelligent as humans," so why do you complicate the discussion by adding BS to it?
Dogs *do* have some intelligence, and (just like some people are smarter than others) some dogs are smarter than others ... so I don't know why we can't agree on this simple FACT.
Do you think all dogs have ZERO intelligence? I hope not.
Do you think all dogs have the exact same level of intelligence? I hope not.
Or, do you have the basic sense to realize some dogs ARE smarter than others? I hope so
Well, then here is were we disagree in a nutshell: I *would* be breeding to Robert T.
If the Old Man (who's been in the fastest of fast lanes since the 1960s) has never seen a head dog as good as Robert T Jr. (except for his father, the Original Robert T), then we're not talking about "a genetic fluke" we're talking about an ACE who passed on his ACE characteristics into a son ... which is made all the more remarkable because the original Robert T wasn't bred all that much
There is no dog you know of "who doesn't destroy the environment" ... who beat four 4xWs ... and whose daddy beat two Grand Champions and two Champions ... plus 5 other dogs.
The absolute key to having THE BEST performance dogs is breeding to (and harnessing genetically) THE BEST performance characteristics ... not to breed to the dogs on your yard that are "the most convenient" to raise
Now, if a man is lucky and gets all of that in one dog, great.
But if a particular dog is absolutely excellent ... I mean truly superior ... but he has some flaws, or annoying tendencies, then IF you're a performance breeder you have to bite the bullet and breed to that ace ... because the moment you don't, you are NOT breeding for the best dogs, you're breeding for your own personal preferences of conduct.
LOL, mine too. But there aren't too many dogs that could "think on their feet" and outsmart some of the baddest dogs who ever lived, more so than Robert T and Robert T Jr. ... who beat 6 Champions and 2 Grand Champions between the father/son team.
I seriously doubt too many father/son dogs you know can make that statement ... and I for one would just about give my left nut to have those 2 dogs on my yard, along with a couple of my foundation bitches, because I know I would have hurt a lot of people's feelings with their pups
Jack
I was talking specifically about your example or analogy. The two men chained around the neck. I was commenting that the one that knows and understands he cannot break free of that situation with what is provided in your example, is the smarter or more intelligent human. Never suggested the "gamest, smartest dogs are also the ones who "know they can't win" so there's nothing for you to disagree with me there. You and I would have been on the same page on that one.
My old man teaches a cognitive intervention class in the state prison system here in Texas. The ones who KNOW and UNDERSTAND the situation and system they are in, are the ones who thrive and succeed. Those who buck that system are the ones, one way or another, are culled in some fashion or another. Either they end up with more time, less privileges, isolation, etc. I offer this b/c you used Alcatraz as an example. The only thing I would ask about the Alcatraz example is, did any of the escapees actually survive? If not, how smart where they? Does committing unintentional suicide equate to more intelligence than the men who never tried to escape? I'm not sure. I don't judge in this way b/c in this situation, I cannot say what I would do without BEING in that situation. Does it show more spirit? Maybe, maybe not. Who's gamer? The man who lives in Alcatraz the remainder of his life, or the guy who escapes and dies? Lots of things to consider and also why I don't think too many comparisons can be made b/t man and animal.
I guess to add to this thread or topic, I hate dogs that are a pain in the ass. Especially when I am feeding more than 10 dogs. I've fed enough good dogs and bad dogs to not have tolerance for them and to also know, I can feed, keep and have a good time with a quality dog that is not a problem. Had I never fed a "good" dog before and the only one I had was a dog that is always wrecking shit, I guess I would keep him. But not any more. If a dog is a barker, water bowl fighter, dog house fighter, extreme digger, etc., Then I will sure enough remove that dog one way or another.
The LG blood is a blood known for certain things. Like a lot of lines are, of course. LG was known for, or at least had/has a reputation for culling pretty hard. It shows in the females in his line. If a bitch did not do a good job of whelping and raising pups, she was a goner. Over the years, this has developed a line that throws extremely maternal females. Bitches that whelp and raise practically every pup thus making life easier on the owner. I'm sure there were some good dogs lost along the way, but I'm also sure there were good dogs passed on as well.
To each their own when it comes to property in the USA.....in my opinion.
My Icon dog not only was smarter than any dog on my yard in the pit, but if he ran some toy off his chain ... and couldn't get it with his front feet ... he'd turn around and try (many times successfully) to get it with his back feet.
I'd say only 1 in 500 dogs will think to "reach" with their back feet too.
Jack
I disagree with the dog vs human analogy. Most of the dogs i've seen on chain dont really mind all that much and there could be more than a few reasons why one is trying to get off his chain.
And as far as your little endzone spike goes, i signed up to your site for entertainment purposes not to kiss ass or back up all your know it all posts with a hat tip. So, you know what they say about opinions....
Why? Because it doesn't suit your baseless statements?
Funny how human psychology is literally based on dog psychology ... but I guess the facts of life don't concern you much.
We actually agree in a couple of respects, but not so much on others.
I agree, most of the dogs don't seem to mind so much, mine too. But that has nothing to do with what I said.
I said that many, if not most, of the chain-fighters (hole-diggers, balistic tree-hangers, etc.), or problem dogs in general, seem to have an inordinate amount of drive/intelligence ... and are NOT content just sitting there on the chain, like well-fed cattle.
Not sure what you mean by my endzone spike, but I don't need you to "back up" my posts, nor do I need you to kiss my ass either.
But it would help you live up to your chosen handle if you would give examples, and attempt to back up your statements with facts, instead of just posting mindless, cursword-filled one-liners.
Yeah, and it's also true that some are kept cleaner and smell better than others, lol
Jack
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
