I sympathise, but the cliché is not strictly true. Nature is all about diversity. Just like humans have a certain ratio of “bad apples” born where someone is hard wired wrong, so do dogs, and likely all animals.

Psychopathology is real. It would be a mistake to deny Nature it’s agency. There are people who belong in an institution. Dogs perhaps moreso.

To your point, yes most problems are attributable to bad trainers, but even here there is something missing. Bad breeders - natural reproduction would select for fitness, and truly bad dogs would be limited to a small fraction of background instances. We have lots of people actively breeding killers with outsized agression and fear and ferocity, with hair triggers, on purpose. I’m not talking about guard dogs where fierce protective instincts are balanced with loyalty and bonding and intelligence. I mean literal psychokillers.

I’m circling around Pit-Bulls and the like, but I need to be clear. The breed is fine. Some of my best friends are pit bulls. Diversity naturally makes most of them good dogs, just more context dependant and trainer demanding. I’m not talking about those. I’m only referring to a small subset that were overbred and the natural background level of freakshow.

If you’ve only known pets from reputable breeders, accidental litters or the shelter rescues, understand that these select for the good dogs. If that’s all you know, you would have reason to doubt that bad dogs are possible.

Fine. Winning lottery numbers then. I can ponder the depths of the other ineffable questions from a beach with a tasty beverage somewhere nice.

How does one get grants for this type of research? Asking for a friend.

Not all. There are some bad boys out there.

Winning lottery numbers for next draw. When will humanity go extinct? Where are the nearest 1 billion species with near human level intelligence or greater. How do we safely and conveniently travel faster than light.

So many to choose.

You sure you want that?

I disagree and I don’t think you got it, but I updoot for good faith, some fair points, wit and humour. I’ll always drink to that. ;)

c/wholesome

Hmmm. Upvote or downvote? You make solid points. You are defending a position in good faith. Yet “mental disorder”?

Your mentality and eagerness to stake a position and defend the bastion hurts as much as helps.

catholic sins were only defined later

You are making an artificial distinction. Catholicism can be, but shouldn’t be viewed as a thing with a start. It’s part of a continuum. Judaism>Christianity>Islam. Catholic sins weren’t defined later. Like all culture, they evolved from earlier sins. Even calling them Abrahamic Religions as we do is making the same error. The tradition didn’t just emerge, it evolved from predecessors and it has descendants.

natural law is the law of nature, that exists and has nothing to do with religious nonsense but instinct, which originated from evolution.

Aside from the above linking culture, specifically religion to evolution in a real tangible way, please consider that natural selection over time takes random mutations and selects for reproductive fitness. It doesn’t care about what is “good” it only cares about what is most advantageous until new offspring can extend the continuity. We tend to think of this in terms of physiological of biochemical traits, but that’s a narrow view too. Our minds are a product of evolution. Our thinking is a product of our minds.

“Sin” is just part of a evolutionary cultural continuum that started somewhere in the roots of cognition where “actions>consequences” evolved and branched into “sin” and “karma”.

Creatures with evolved complex cognition need their complex social constructs to evolve to survive as well. They become condensed, efficient, easily axiomized artifacts like “the golden rule”, “religion”, philosophy, ethics, morality. All part of a continuum where divergence, convergence and speciation occur.

Religious and atheists are seperate cognitive sub-species who can choose to compete, fall into a predator-prey relationship (e.g. inquisition or communist religious purge) or we can coexist in our respective niches or, like all the best stuff in nature, become symbiotic and make the system better for all.

In short, not Religion vs Evolution. Religion as evolution. 😉👉

We’ll always have each other.

They say misery Loves company We can build a company That makes misery

Frustrated Incorporated.

Biometrics are a username not a password. Authentication is not authorization. This sounds like trying to stop man in the middle attacks with something susceptable to man in the middle attacks.

Maybe I’m just not getting the idea.

With your Barber’s consent, anything is possible. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

This. Are you me?

Not a Barber but my Barber loves me, and I him. You are a posable manequin meant to hold a position. They will gently guide your head to the desired position whenever a change is required. Gently acquiesce. Tip generously.

Sorry, I’m all out of heroine.

Being “The One” is like being in love. No one can tell you you’re in love, you just know it, balls to bones.

This is where I say "Hmmm that’s interesting.

That’s when you say…

Perhaps by your standards. ;)

Celebrate is not the right word. Trump is just the crash test dummy front man. The entire administration and republican party have lost their minds/shown their true colors. It’s not time to celebrate. There’s still a lot of work to be done.

I will however drink my best bottle of wine and toast the moment.

Two thoughts to consider. First is that the author might be abusing language in a way that deliberately obscures meaning, to pursue another goal. I.e. appearing intellectual or appealing to a reader who wants to fit this aesthetic.

The second is that LLMs do this as well. As they adapt to the language in your questions and subject material, they can diverge from the ideal path of bridge building between the reader and subject matter and either dumb it down so as to lose meaning (not explain in laymen’s terms), or further obscure meaning by hallucination, misinterpretation, abuse of language in trying to appear to be something.

It may help. It may hurt. They aren’t reliable enough yet to know which is which especially when you are unfamiliar enough with the material and trusting the system is all you got. The better method is joining a book club or perhaps a discussion forum for the fans of the book if available. Maybe a forum on the general topic were you might encounter other readers where you can discuss the topic.

My dog sleeps right in between me and my wife. She likes to be the big spoon and the little spoon.