spring/summer 2006, no. 7
An Evolutionary Basis to Behavioral Differences Between Cats and Dogs?
An Almost-Serious Scholarly Debate
by Glenn Geher
spring/summer 2006, no. 7
An Evolutionary Basis to Behavioral Differences Between Cats and Dogs?
An Almost-Serious Scholarly Debate
by Glenn Geher
i
Do Innate Behavioral Differences Between Dogs and Cats Exist?
A Debate Between the Esteemed Canine Constructionist Psychologist, Dr. ArfArf Anythinggoes of Sheppard State University and the Renowned Feline Evolutionary Psychologist, Professor MeowMeow Immutable, of Carnivore College
Moderated by Celina the Seemingly Centrist Squirrel
Celina:
Thank you all for attending this important debate. Of course, this debate is extremely topical in light of the recent comments of President Pawinmouth of Carnivore College which suggest that dogs and cats may have different general skills from one another because of innate differences between the species.
Welcome to our esteemed panelists and guests. Okay: let’s get started. Let’s start with the heart of the matter …
Professor Immutable, evolutionary psychologists are often accused of being specist, assuming that cats are naturally better than dogs and thus deserve higher status and more power across all elements of our society. How do you respond to such criticism?
Professor MeowMeow Immutable:
First, many thanks to Celina for hosting this important debate. Are cats naturally better than dogs? That’s like saying that blue is naturally better than red. The evolutionary approach to differences between cats and dogs emphasizes similarities between the species to the extent that environmental pressures across their evolutionary heritages were similar, and, further, this perspective predicts phenotypal differences between dogs and cats to the extent that such pressures were different across evolutionary time.
Dr. ArfArf Anythinggoes:
MeowMeow – think about the societal implications of this doctrine! While your ostensibly scientific account of predicted differences between the species seems reasonable, it neglects the important social ramifications that are implied! If we accept that cats are presumably naturally ‘different’ from dogs, then we are essentially endorsing a dangerous philosophy of 'separate but equal.' It is our obligation as citizens to work against such a way of thinking.
Professor MeowMeow Immutable:
But consider the compelling nature of the evidence supporting the notion of psychological differences between cats and dogs! Across all cultures, dogs are more social than are cats. Further, across all cultures, cats are considerably less able to be trained to jump through hoops and the like compared with dogs. This analysis is not value-laden, it is simply fact-based.
Nonsense! In my 35 years of research on this topic, I have found, time and time again, that any
apparent differences between cats and dogs are attributable to social roles, social expectations, and social-constructionist processes. For instance, in my lab, we have consistently documented that cats are capable of jumping through hoops! We've all simply been socialized so as not to expect cats to be able to jump through hoops. Worse, this pattern of socialization may have detrimental effects on the self-esteem of cats in general. So you see, my constructionist analysis is just as concerned with the welfare of cats as it is with the welfare of dogs!
Celina:
Okay – I think we are getting somewhere. Professor Immutable, your approach is often framed as a genetically deterministic approach. How do you respond to such comments?
Celina, that criticism is so off-target and misguided! While evolutionary psychologists believe that behavioral patterns of all species evolved via evolutionary forces, we also believe that most organisms show a great deal of behavioral flexibility in light of changes in environmental conditions. For instance, while we would argue that dogs are generally likely to form groups with social rules and such, more so than are cats, we also believe that dogs may be encouraged to be relatively solitary under certain conditions. We hardly believe that each species has one simple, immutable way of being.
MeowMeow – I must say that I am uncomfortable with you suggesting that dogs tend to be more ‘pack oriented’ than cats by nature. This proposition is exactly the kind of specist garbage that is poisoning the minds of college students across the country! Society simply expects relatively pack-oriented behavior from dogs more so than from cats – my research demonstrates this point strongly! Structures within society – often created by cats in the first place – clearly play the key role in shaping such behavioral patterns.
But the pack-oriented nature of dogs exists in ALL SOCIETIES! Do you really believe that this fact is altogether irrelevant? Might it be that societal rules are actually manifestations of evolutionary processes? That is certainly the stance of evolutionary psychology. Societal rules are not random – and they are not unrelated to our evolutionary heritage. Thus, while they play an important role in shaping behavioral patterns, they are not reasonably conceptualized as ‘distinct from evolutionary explanations.’
Celina:
Aha – I see. Now we seem to really be getting somewhere. Okay, I have one more question. Do you believe that there is hope in the future for creating harmony between dogs and cats? Dr. Anythinggoes, you’re first this time.
Yes, I do believe that peace between cats and dogs is possible. However, it is only possible if we realize that the apparent differences between them are really the effects of inequitable social structures that have been created primarily by cats who are consistently promoting their own self-interests. Cats need to own up to their role in creating the kind of specist qualities that typify our society. MeowMeow, your brand of psychology, I’m afraid, works quite against that goal and I believe that universities should not allow it to be taught for the sake of our society.
ArfArf, you really have my dander up now! To say that all differences between cats and dogs are socially constructed by self-interested cats across the history of mammals is preposterous …. This view just makes me …….. RRRREOWWW!!!! ….
Celina:
Oh my … MeowMeow, please … please get off ArfArf’s neck … oh … this is not good … well, there you have it folks! g
Glenn Geher received his PhD in social psychology at the University of New Hampshire in 1997 under the mentorship of Becky Warner. His dissertation, which won the university's Sigma Xi Outstanding Dissertation Award, addressed adults' perceptions of romantic partners and intimates in light of social-perceptual biases (such as self-enhancement).
He is currently associate professor of psychology at SUNY New Paltz and is chair of the University's Evolutionary Studies Program Development Committee, which is working to implement an interdisciplinary undergraduate concentration focusing on evolutionary principles applied across disciplines. This program is modeled closely after an existing program at Binghamton University (directed by David Sloan Wilson). At New Paltz, Glenn teaches courses in evolutionary psychology, social psychology, personality psychology, statistics, and research methods.
Glenn has more than 20 publications on multiple topics in social and personality psychology. His newest research, on the topic of mating intelligence, seeks to synthesize mating-relevant constructs from evolutionary social psychology with extant research and theory on the topic of intelligence. In addition to his current empirical work on this topic, he is co-editing a book on mating intelligence with Geoffrey Miller (of the University of New Mexico) titled Mating Intelligence: Theoretical and Empirical Insights into Intimate Relationships.
Glenn is also the lead guitar player for one of the only all-faculty punk-rock bands in the country: Questionable Authorities.
Copyright © 2006 Entelechy: Mind & Culture. New Paltz, NY. All rights reserved.
