• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dogs DO NOT understand language

Bodi

Just waiting for my set...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
123,703
Reaction score
28,002
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
My cats understand the sound of a can opener and an opening fridge.
 
I'm not sure what distinction is being made here. They understand words, but not language. Language is words. Is there some group of people out there arguing dogs speak english fluently or some ****?
 
I'm not sure what distinction is being made here. They understand words, but not language. Language is words. Is there some group of people out there arguing dogs speak english fluently or some ****?

Haven't you seen Air Bud?
 
I'm not sure what distinction is being made here. They understand words, but not language. Language is words. Is there some group of people out there arguing dogs speak english fluently or some ****?
The article says words, or rather language, in order to make the distinction between the two. The dog understands sounds.
 
We apply meaning to a word, which is a sound. Dogs apply meaning to a word, which is a sound. Like Deuce, I'm unclear on the practical difference.
 
My cats understand the sound of a can opener and an opening fridge.

They react... they do not understand. There is a stimulus and the cat responds. Stimulus . Response.
 
That's OK. Me and my dogs communicate just fine.
 
They associate sounds and stimulus response... not the actual word or its meaning.

then how does my dog know the difference between "cheese" and "sleep / bed?" how does our younger dog know "want to go to Grandpa's?" they know the words. they are smart little mother****ers.
 
We apply meaning to a word, which is a sound. Dogs apply meaning to a word, which is a sound. As the saying goes, it's a distinction without a difference.

Tell a human and tell a dog the following: Food? Sit? What is the difference. See which one can explain the difference (or show in the dogs sake).

;)
 
then how does my dog know the difference between "cheese" and "sleep / bed?" how does our younger dog know "want to go to Grandpa's?" they know the words. they are smart little mother****ers.

I always say, "Thank God they don't have thumbs". ;)
 
That's OK. Me and my dogs communicate just fine.

Just so long as you understand that they don't know what the words mean...
 
Just so long as you understand that they don't know what the words mean...

Why would I care? Why would any dog lover want to disabuse themselves of the notion that dogs understand us when we talk, gesture and emote?

I mean, does joy offend you?:(
 
The article says words, or rather language, in order to make the distinction between the two. The dog understands sounds.

All spoken language is sounds that are understood by the listener. All language is just symbols, because we can't transmit thought directly.
 
I'm not sure what distinction is being made here. They understand words, but not language. Language is words. Is there some group of people out there arguing dogs speak english fluently or some ****?

Level of understanding is the distinction.

Can they learn a system of words such that they can combine new words to express thoughts? Well, that obviously can't be tested. But what can is whether you can teach them certain words then combine them to make new meanings, and see if they behave in a way that suggests understanding.




The point is that basic pavlovian (sp?) conditioning only really relies on the animal associating a specific stimulus with a specific thing or set of things. If a dog knows that when it hears the sound that saying "sit" makes and ends up associating that with sitting down via treats or whatever other training, that doesn't rise to the level of understanding language.

Granted, their inability to speak makes testing things hard but I see no reason to conclude that one could teach a dog to understand English such that it might understand a lecture on the many different ways various cultures think people should sit to be polite. You just get: if that thing makes that noise, I do this physical act.
 
Stimulus Response Theory is a concept in psychology that refers to the belief that behavior manifests as a result of the interplay between stimulus and response.

https://www.psychologistworld.com/behavior/stimulus-response-theory

You can use al the studies in the world, get a dog and get a bond with them, then tell us that they don’t know language, I can tell my buddy to go get a particular toy and he will go to the toy box, pull out every toy there and if it isn’t there he will go looking until he finds it without any coaching.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Whether he understands or not I find when I talk with my dog it is therapy for me.


photo (3).jpg
 
Just so long as you understand that they don't know what the words mean...

Maybe they don’t know what words actually mean, but they can read our body movements and we can read their body movements and understand what each other wants, is that not a form of language if we both understand, because they can’t seam to talk to us


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
That's OK. Me and my dogs communicate just fine.

As long as there is an ability to understand, however minimal, some communication is possible. It's a hell of a stretch to "this animal understands language".


Try reading Gibbon to your dogs and see if they act out Constantine's final campaign for you...
 
Back
Top Bottom