How are dogs so trusting in the world we live in?

Sweet little face 

Gorgeous 

I used to have a lurcher called Dylan he was 6 months old when we got him. He was a big boy and a solid dog. We lost him last year to Alabama rot which is a an extremely nasty infection dogs get. Antibiotic resistant and only 10% of dogs survive it. He was 12 when we lost him. He was a very lazy dog and used to lie on his back legs in the air exposing himself no a care in the world. It’s only Lucy I have left now the Dalmatian in my profile picture and she getting on in age but still has life in her. 

In my opinion, dogs are the best people. They give love unconditionally.

They ask for so little but give so much.

Also, in my opinion, we need more dogs and fewer people

Dude....we are "one and the same" in many, many respects.  I know that I feel uncomfortable about that, and I presume that you feel equally so.

I note that you are a zoologist by training.  I have "insight" into the rehabilitation of people, on behalf of dogs.

You might be surprised by just how close we are (whether you like that fact or not).....but I equally appreciate that I am a "desperately" confusing entity to understand.  My apologies Martin, for any confusion or impression of facetiousness or sarcasm from my end.  

I merely aim to advocate for my 4-legged non-verbalising breathern.

Assuredly benign,

Number.

Are you surprised that an autistic person might take things at face value, that is literally? On this site I tend to flag anything I mean facetiously or sarcastically, just to be on the safe side. I am a zoologist by training and what I said has a direct bearing on the original question. Dogs are genetically programmed to trust humans. That is why abused dogs can be rehabilitated by people, especially those trained in the psychology of dogs.

I've had two retired racing greyhounds and know several more, they're lovely dogs or rather hounds, there is a difference between a hound and a dog. Reading things like this sicken me, despite everything The Retired Greyhound Trust does to get retiring dogs into rescue and rehoming these things still happen. I'm so happy this hound's story has a happy ending, some dogs never really learn to trust fully again, they maybe OK with thier new family, but wary around others.

My two boys lived a happy and comfortable retirement and died at ripe old ages loved and still missed. If anyone is thinking of rehoming a dog, I'd thoroughly recommend a retired greyhound, they're quite patient, lazy and thieving. They're 40mph couch potatoes, 20 mins exercise twice a day is the minimum requirement, some like to walk for longer, sometimes just at the weekend, a bit like us, they'll not endurance dogs, but sprinters, so you'll get complaints if you try and take them for a 10 mile hike. Bins and food left out are rarely safe from them and what they'll eat is quite astonishing, my old Dogglet really liked a curry, rice, dhal, a spicy aubergene curry and mint raita to go with it. They can be incredibly patient with other animals and small humans, not all of them obviously, but when our cat Boris was a kitten he's sleep with the dogs and then took to using thier willies as cushions, the dogs were alarmed by this and started crossing thier legs when they saw him coming.

All the more reason to treat them well and with lots of love.

Martin said:

produces the physical changes seen in many domestic dogs when compared to their grey wolf ancestors.

Well naturally !  Quite literally !!

Sorry if I have miscommunicated my understandings of this matter.

I have (and surely there can be no doubt that) my quote from you above is de facto truth.

Foxes are foxes, members of the Canidae, the same family as wolves and dogs. The red, bushy-tailed animals that rich people used to hunt on horseback, the same animals who raid suburban waste bins. The take home message is that selecting for docility and friendliness in a wild animal produces changes in physical characteristics as well. These physical characteristics produced in foxes remarkably mimic those seen in the domestication of the grey wolf when humans turned the grey wolf into the dog. All dogs are descendants of grey wolves. Many dogs have, compared to grey wolves, shortened jaws/snouts, variegated coat colours and patterns, floppy ears and curled tails (think huskies). The surprising thing is that selecting for behavioural traits, and only behavioural traits, produces the physical changes seen in many domestic dogs when compared to their grey wolf ancestors.

In reverse, the domesticated physical characteristics in modern dogs can be viewed as evidence that their ancestors were selectively bred, not for these physical features, but for friendliness to humans. Hence dogs being trusting of humans, even when perhaps they should not. They have been selectively bred to trust humans and are now genetically programmed to be so.

Martin said:

Sound familiar?

Yes.  I understand what breeding means.

In the particular experiment you mention with those foxes, I can't imagine or visualise the type of animal that you describe?  Did they become monkeys? - it's the "curled tail" that is putting me off ?!  Novel coat?!  Pokimen?

Nope - Number computes as zero.

This keeps happening.

Reset button defective.

PS - Even with the very best "selective breeding" programme that you can envisage, the litters/off-spring will still regularly surprise and confuse the logic and aims of selective breeding.  I've met Lions who are mice and ants that are crocodiles.  Its the simple wonders that I like.

PPS - Please put me out of my misery regarding your animal please.

`

There was a multi-generational experiment with foxes. They were selectively bred solely on the grounds of being friendly towards and handleable by humans. Within a few generations, these foxes, selected only on their disposition, developed shorter jaws, novel coat colours and patterns, less erect ears and curled tails. Sound familiar?

Hmmmmm....With every human, and with every dog, I NEVER choose to judge by the cover.....personally.  Moreover, your proposed "rule of thumb" above, certainly doesn't correspond with my experience of dogs IRL.  The character and behaviour of a dog does not correspond to its appearance, although it's physical prowess DOES normally correspond in the way you suggest.

I've never even heard of those breeds. But I have noticed the less 'bread' a dog looks the less stupid it seems to be ... and also ironicly often less agressive. Generaly if a dog has pointy ears, a long snout and is 'normal' size it tends to be better behaved and less interested in humans it doesn't know.

A dog's trust can be broken, and they can be traumatised, just like us. But they're social creatures that prefer to be a part of a pack to being alone. Their very survival instincts calls for having others they can trust around them. So even a dog that has been traumatised and abused can learn to trust and love again, while people can hold onto that damage forever. It doesn't mean the dog makes a full recovery, mind.

I love her already!

Yes, and my point is that not all (by any means) dogs have been bred for the purpose of being docile and pliable.  Have you met a Malinois or Malamute?.....these are different "thinkers."

My point is if you took humans and subjected them to generations of breeding to make them dossile and pliable you might find they were rather trusting too ... and probably brain damaged by medical standards.

Sometimes, but most certainly not always Peter.

Their brains have been scrambeled by generations of in breeding. For example if you give a wolf a secure wooden box full of meat it breaks the box. Give it to a dog and it just looks at you with pleeding eyes unsure what to do.