Why Don't We Pet Humans like Dogs?

[samijiben]

I am not making a joke with this question. This is a serious philosophical question.

Today I was chilling in the hottub & this dude with down syndrome came right up in my shit & started to pet me. It seemed pretty normal.

Why aren't we petting each other all the time like we do to dogs? Social conditioning? Stigma? Tabboo? 

Contemplate.

[Carl-Richard]

We usually focus on other ways of giving humans attention, like talking. But we do "pet" each other, e.g. to show physical affection or to communicate, e.g. patting somebody on the shoulder when they did a good job. It's just more likely between people who have strong bonds.

Edited June 30 by Carl-Richard

[samijiben]

5 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

We usually focus on other ways of giving humans attention, like talking. But we do "pet" each other, e.g. to show physical affection or to communicate, e.g. patting somebody on the shoulder when they did a good job. It's just more likely between people who have strong bonds.

5 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

We usually focus on other ways of giving humans attention, like talking. But we do "pet" each other, e.g. to show physical affection or to communicate, e.g. patting somebody on the shoulder when they did a good job. It's just more likely between people who have strong bonds.

I think its because it is tabboo 

if everyone were more conscious & didn't supress their sexuality, perhaps we would inhabit a world of spontaneous orgies and increased openness to weird shit that in today's world would get your ass incarcerated.

Just a thought.

[Carl-Richard]

23 minutes ago, samijiben said:

I think its because it is tabboo 

if everyone were more conscious & didn't supress their sexuality, perhaps we would inhabit a world of spontaneous orgies and increased openness to weird shit that in today's world would get your ass incarcerated.

Just a thought.

Spontaneous orgies during UN council meetings. That would be something.

[Jannes]

Haha the dude with down syndrome was so oblivious that he broke your paradigm, I can really picture that.  We give ourselves similiar affection with body contact, nice gestures, scratching our hair and heads even.. but the owner of the pet is usually on another league intelligence wise which explains why he has a pure owner to pet relationship to his pet while there is no good reason to treat most humans that way but of course there are power inbalances, simple minded people with simple jobs who are told what to do.. 

I think we also spare a lot of affection to each other because of lack of development. 

[Basman]

We generally prefer more subtle and sophisticated forms of affection. A dog lacks the intelligence to appreciate loving eye contact or emotional availability. 

Tards are kind of like dogs. They are very simple but also sincere in a childlike manner. They will love you just if your kind and give them attention. 

[Reciprocality]

The most obvious answer would be that though we can and will logically separate the meaning of a) stroking a cat and b) the characteristics of the cat these two things will not actually be separated merely for that reason, and their non-separation is tied to a subtler and deeper set of logic that pertains to the reality and not merely potentiality of the situation.

We may use James Gibsons theory of affordances to illustrate it better, you don't premeditate the time when you will pet the cat, instead the behaviour and characteristics of the cat spontaneously makes you think of petting (affords you the idea of petting), plenty of these characteristics are for instance present in young children but disappears more the older the child becomes. 

Some of these characteristics are: cuteness, non-agency and innocence. 

 

That pets and small children react positively to petting is a given, the bodily pleasure is a given, they do not yet separate themselves from the one who is petting them via a rigid representation of a self, and thus do not need to calculate the emotional entailments of the situation that would dissimulate it.

Edited July 1 by Reciprocality

[Schizophonia]

lol

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Reciprocality said:

The most obvious answer would be that though we can and will logically separate the meaning of a) stroking a cat and b) the characteristics of the cat these two things will not actually be separated merely for that reason, and their non-separation is tied to a subtler and deeper set of logic that pertains to the reality and not merely potentiality of the situation.

We may use James Gibsons theory of affordances to illustrate it better, you don't premeditate the time when you will pet the cat, instead the behaviour and characteristics of the cat spontaneously makes you think of petting (affords you the idea of petting), plenty of these characteristics are for instance present in young children but disappears more the older the child becomes. 

Some of these characteristics are: cuteness, non-agency and innocence. 

 

That pets and small children react positively to petting is a given, the bodily pleasure is a given, they do not yet separate themselves from the one who is petting them via a rigid representation of a self, and thus do not need to calculate the emotional entailments of the situation that would dissimulate it.

*Somebody starts petting Reciprocality* — "I've calculated the emotional entailments of the situation and dissimulated it".

[Reciprocality]

15 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

*Somebody starts petting Reciprocality* — "I've calculated the emotional entailments of the situation and dissimulated it".

@Carl-Richard Hah, humour! Is it reasonable to expect others to write how they speak in forums where the availability of long format communication and higher precision of abstraction is the reason forums get chosen in the first place? 

[samijiben]

It's super fascinating how *retards* are sometimes super conscious beings, like they are tripping all the time.

Can anyone come forth with an explanation for why tards are some of the most intelligent people out there?

This is just my experience, but they seem to be more in touch with their nature, and this comes at the expense of functionality and effectiveness in the world.

[Willie]

On 6/30/2025 at 5:40 AM, samijiben said:

I am not making a joke with this question. This is a serious philosophical question.

Today I was chilling in the hottub & this dude with down syndrome came right up in my shit & started to pet me. It seemed pretty normal.

Why aren't we petting each other all the time like we do to dogs? Social conditioning? Stigma? Tabboo? 

Contemplate.

I’ve pet people, and people have pet me. It’s great!

[Schizophonia]

In my area men tend to be tactile and give each other nicknames like "my bunny"

[Sugarcoat]

Typical actualizer to turn daily events to deep philosophical questioning 

[Schizophonia]

Imagine if we were like cats.
Like, in the middle of class at high school, we'd have a bathroom break to clean ourselves up.
Hey, everyone takes off their clothes to lick themselves and their friends.

[samijiben]

It is a deep question intertwined with a twisted, supressed, unconscious Human Sexuality that suffers from the fear of being ousted or banished from the pack. Our sexual expression is castrated by the constant reminder in the back of your head to "stay in line." I am merely pointing out that you do not act on your impulses in public — and that is normal. Most people do not act on their impulses. I mean, thank God, right? Imagine how scary THAT would be...

But this retard guy didn't give a fuck. He came right up and started petting me! Again, if a dog does this to you, it's normal. If a retard does it to you, considering your a forgiving person, it's also normal. But in NO cases is it normal for a normal person to get up in your shit anf start petting you out of nowhere.

Why?