Doug was "Responding to a recent wake-up message from Tobin Quereau about
LO2486 about High Play.... " He goes on to say:
>I was really struck by examples of inter-species play among animals such
>as a Bear and a Dog, wherein various cues to the fact that play was being
>invited introduced these situations.
I was glad to hear from Doug, and I don't want to contradict anyone, but
my experience in training, working with and playing with animals leads me
to a different conclusion.
In what appears to be animal play, what we are seeing is not play as we
know it, but instinctive behavior that originally had survival value,
expressed in a non-survival setting. For example, a dog pulling on a rope
is behaviorally tearing apart a large animal such as a deer. A cat
playing with a string is acting on its hunting instinct. And a bear (and
dog, and chimpanzee) rolling on its back is engaging in submissive
behavior that recognizes the alpha position of the human (this is what
enables lion tamers to manage big cats).
Animal trainers are successful inasmuch as they are able to get the
critters to adapt their behavior. There's no such thing as play, and I'd
suggets it's because animals don't feel emotion as we do. (Tobin, in your
experience with play, would you conclude that there's a necessary link
with emotion?)
There's an important lesson here for learning. Just as animals seek to
match their instinctive behaviors with the trainer's expectations, so do
people seek to match their actions with the situations in which they find
themselves. As much as I see clearly the difference between humans and
other critters, I think we would do well to see deeply into people to
understand their needs, and try to connect learning experiences with them.
Does this make sense?
Dave
-- David E. Birren Phone: (608)267-2442 Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Resources Fax: (608)267-3579 Bureau of Management & Budget E-mail: birred@dnr.state.wi.us"Our future is to be food - Wisdom's gift - for what comes after us." -- Saadi (Neil Douglas-Klotz)