French veterinarian Professor Michel Klein, who has over 20 years treats dogs belonging crowned party and movie stars, says: show me a dog, and I will tell about its owner more than a psychologist.The owners of poodles and Maltese, in his opinion, as clever as their dog, and a little selfish, owners of dogs arrogant and brave, owners of dogs without a sense of humor and so scary swagger, owners of hunting dogs sincere and direct. Compatriot Klein animal psychologist Henri Daudet believes that the most positive qualities of the owners of foxterrier. In General he agreed with the classification Klein, particularly with respect to the owners of dogs. A dog owner has filed for Daudet in court for defamation. And Daudet told the judges: "Here, see for yourself..."
But really - is it possible to judge the character of a person to breed a pet? What kind of people keep dogs and cats, fish and parrots? To understand this, one must first answer the question: why do people keep Pets?
Almost like people
Psychologists and sociologists have long been asking the same question, and there are several theories about this. Perhaps the most common of them is the theory of the surrogate. It is assumed that animals-Pets serve the owner of the replacement of normal human relations, which he somehow deprived. Proponents of this theory often cite the example of old maids, for which all the light in the window - my favorite dog or cat, sometimes more than one. Hence the conclusion: pet lovers are socially isolated, barely make ends meet, accidents, usually older people who use their Pets as a drug addict uses drugs to escape from reality.
Such accidents do exist in society, but they constitute only a small part of pet lovers. Sociological research commissioned by companies which sell food for domestic animals, showed that the shape of the average pet owner is the very opposite of the stereotype, draw theory surrogate. Often purchase animal young families relating to the prosperous middle class and with small children.
Another popular theory relates to the possession of Pets by wealth (we have an extreme expression of this theory can be heard in this form: "Zazhralis! With the fat mad dogs parasole, and here people are starving! "). Indeed, some Pets, especially exotic, large, rare breeds, with medals and pedigree, are purchased and are held by people who want to show their richness, but not always so rich to buy "rolls-Royce".
However, the theory of wealth does not withstand criticism from anthropologists and archaeologists. It is proved that back in the stone age people were picked up and grown young of wild animals without any practical purposes, and it continues to do modern primitive tribes, remaining at the same level of welfare. The Indians Comanche contain dogs, not using them either for hunting or for protection. Brazilian Indians were kalapalo keep handmade birds after death bury them in special cemeteries.
Who tamed
Finally, consider the theory of nest parasitism. Put on her knees with somebody puppy or a kitten, and, as a rule, you will be able to observe a typical emotional reaction. Man wants to caress and stroke the animal, talk with him, to feed and pet it. It seems that the normal behavior is suppressed in some deep unconditional reflex over which people almost no power. The animal grows, the owner started to treat him as a man. Your dog or cat we attribute human thoughts, feelings and motivations, try to talk with them. On a conscious level we understand that it's not the people, but behave as if dealing with a human being or, rather, with the child. Doesn't this remind you of the behavior of birds in a nest which laid the egg of the cuckoo? Parasite-Makushok becomes the adoptive parents of the same roads as their Chicks, and even more expensive. Maybe some animal species have adapted to survive in the "nest" of man? This hypothesis has its supporters.
But in recent years, largely from random observations, the most probable theory. It all began in 1977 when a group of American doctors conducted a detailed survey of 92 men and women who have recently suffered a heart attack. Have been studied almost all aspects of social life of the patient and his life. A year later the doctors again found respondents. It was found that for the year 14 patients died. The questionnaires were re-processed to determine than the survivors in their habits and contacts differed from the dead. Mathematical processing showed that the most important factor determining the survival of the patient after a heart attack over a year, is the presence of his animals.
Direct measurements showed that upon contact with the pet pulse rate and blood pressure in man's fall. The person calms down. Still not entirely clear why this happens, but the effect is quite stable and well defined.
Studying this phenomenon, the researchers surveyed dog owners about their Pets in the perception of the owner. It was found that most dog owners appreciate such qualities as loyalty and affection, attention to the words, gestures and emotions of the owner, clearly expressed joy at his return home and expressive behavior "almost like a man, not only says".
Looks like brothers our smaller share with a person some simple repertoire of behavioral signals that indicate the strong friendly affection. We did, after all, one blood, and many forms of human behavior are based on the behavior of animals. They signal to us: "I love you! I really need! " In addition, not being able to say, animals are unable to criticise us, to deceive or flatter us, they always pay a person to clean the coin. We understand and appreciate.
Thus, animal lovers - not rejected all the losers, not Besedina with fat and rich and not deceived victims of parasites, and reasonable people do more than others in need of love, friendship and encouragement, and uses the company of animals to improve their physical and psychological condition.
The manners and habits of bipedal
Well, is it possible to make some sort of psychologically informed judgement about the individual characteristics of the person depending on his feelings towards certain breeds of domestic animals? Probably, this kind of judgment should not be dogmatic, because the Pets of the same species living in different hosts, very different from each other. However, some General considerations psychologists have tried to formulate. First of all the presence of the dog demonstrates the expressed will to power. A dog is an animal living in a flock, it needs a leader, a role assumed by the master. But there are options. Authoritarian and simultaneously demonstrative person often prefer large, strong dogs. For example, Adolf Hitler was beloved German shepherd, Blondi. The small dog breeds (Italian Greyhound, Maltese, small poodle, Pekingese) may indicate the need to act as a patron, developed the "parent" inclinations. A clear example of this - a large man with a tiny dog, looking out from his pocket or from his bosom. For women little dog often simply replaces or complements the child.
If the dog is a very rare and expensive breed - here, perhaps, the main role played by considerations of prestige. The home of many rich people decorate fancy being bought for big money. Caring for them is usually employed people, and love for animals here and does not smell. Of course, exceptions. Very purebred dog, you can bind the soul.
Cats prefer a person of a different warehouse. Usually these are people less demonstrative and more tolerant of others. A great lover of cats was the prophet Mohammed. According to legend, one day he was sitting at the table, and one of the cats fell asleep on his sleeve. Suddenly called him, and Mohammed, in order not to disturb the noble animal, cut off the sleeve.
Cat, especially not really a pedigree, animal self. Man for her is not a deity, and useful and sometimes interesting companion, living on the same territory. His life cat builds itself and lick the hand that beats her. Bad companion cat could go, and to nice (and useful) to a person sincerely snaps. Accordingly, when a man loves cats, in all probability, can be tolerant of other than him, views and beliefs.
Of course, the cat can get in and out of vanity. In this case, again, this is very bizarre, rare and bought for big money being.
Finally, among a certain part of the elite meets the desire to keep quite so exotic animals: monkeys, lemurs, Boas, lions, crocodiles... again more often it's just a manifestation of vanity. These animals can only regret that their fate is unenviable. It is unlikely that they will receive from such owners more or less decent conditions of detention, especially as the requirements for the content of these exotics are often very specific. Remember Salvador Dali, once appeared in public in Paris by anteater on a leash. No one wrote what became of this anteater on...
The above case is approaching the field of psychopathology. More obvious examples is full of modern "secular chronicle". For example, one has a pool of piranhas and personally feed them alive by rats. My God, from this I want to stay away. The dictator of the Central African Empire" Bokassa was kept in the pool of crocodiles, and the last ruler of Khiva khanate Junaid-Khan - huge catfish. Great fun for both was to observe how the inhabitants of the basins eat their enemies. But that's another story. We mainly have to deal with normal people, which, I believe, in this world the most.
Author:
Ariskin P.
Source:
Our Psychology
No comments:
Post a Comment