[lit-ideas] Re: Homo Sapiens and Canis Familiaris

  • From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 05:03:01 EDT

My apology to L. Helm for having misdescribed  the breed of his Ginger and 
his Sage -- Rhodesian Ridgebacks, indeed, and finest  specimens of the breed 
at that.

Interesting. I forgot to mention a good  example by J. Baker, when she 
edited Grice's "Conception of Value". She  elaborates, along Griceian lines, on 
the old English sheepdog. Of all dogs. The  Griceian argument, as I recall 
it, relates to the idea of 

absolute  value

and

relative value.

------- It trades on these  aspects -- symbiotic aspects -- that have to do 
with Homo Sapiens and Canis  Familiaris. The argument is functional and 
somehow utilitarian. A sheepdog, for  a human, acquires 'absolute value' after 
having received 'relative value' (the  dog qua sheepdog) -- but I would need 
to revise it.

Grice would often say  that Baker helped him understand the most intricate 
points in moral theory and  such as she provided lively illustrations, and 
this may be one of them.  

To consider perhaps. Also, the other examples of  
Homo-Sapiens/Canis-Familiaris dialogue and implicature as illustrated by  Helm.

Cheers,

Speranza
---


In a message dated  6/30/2011 12:58:07 A.M., lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
writes:
Civilization as  we know it could not have developed without the dog.  
Moving
from a  hunter-gatherer society to a fixed society in which animals were
herded  required the dog to do the protecting and much of the herding.  It
would  not have been possible for man to do this by himself and have it be  
an
improvement over hunting and gathering.  
There is also evidence  that man and dog developed symbiotically.
Mitochondrial DNA research places  Mitochondrial Eve in the same time frame
as Mitochondrial Ginger. For most of  man's existence the dog went with him
to hunt game while other dogs stayed  back to protect the women, children 
and
old people.  
Psychologists  tell us that today we will feel better and live longer if we
are in a  relationship with a dog.  The same thing is true of dogs.  They  
are
happiest if they are in a relationship with people.  
Perhaps my  regular treks (when the weather is cool enough) to the local dry
river with  my Rhodesian Ridgebacks (who don't happen to be Rottweilers)
Ginger and Sage  is something like the Hunting-gathering activity of our
ancestors.  Homo  Sapiens and Canis Familiaris originated roughly 200,000
years ago.  Man  and dog took up the herding of animals about 12,000 years
ago.    Which means that for approximately 188,000 years man and dog spent
their days  much as the girls and I do, but hunting and gathering, not just
walking for  pleasure and exercise.  
One of the most important things humans and  dogs can do today is encourage
each other in the sort of exercise that kept  them fit for about 188,000
years.  We can live longer than our ancestors  if we count only years, but
if we focus on the number of fit-years, I wonder  if we would measure up.
But even if we would, why not live longer and be fit  longer?  Why not have
a dog -- perhaps two or three?  

------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts:

  • » [lit-ideas] Re: Homo Sapiens and Canis Familiaris - Jlsperanza