Anthropomorphism, the practice of attributing human emotions and characteristics to animals, is often frowned upon because it tends to humanize animals and disregards the true nature and characteristic of the animal itself.
Nearly everyone who owns and/or loves a dog, talks about their dog as if it were a person; “He is so smart”, “She gets so jealous when I pet the other dog”, “He gets mad at me when I leave him home alone”, “She knows when she did something wrong”. Or we will make statements like “my dog loves me” or “my dog likes doing things to please me”. We often put into words what the dog may be thinking; “my dog thinks everyone is his new best friend”, or “when I meow like a cat, my dog cocks her head to the side like she is asking, ‘is there a cat in there?’”
So is it really so bad to attribute human characteristics to our dogs? The answer really is yes and no.
If we are talking about a dog with a behavior problem, it seems easiest for us to describe the problem in terms with which we are most familiar: he is mad, sad, lonely, etc. Yet this approach mitigates the true nature of the problem. We can’t in fact know how the animal is “feeling”, so when talking about and treating behavior problems, it is far better and much more fair to the animal to describe the behavior in terms of the behavior itself. For example, instead of saying “he is jealous when I pet the other dog”, it would be more helpful to say, “when I pet the other dog, he approaches me and body slams against the other dog pushing the dog out of the way and growls if the other dog tries to re-approach. As soon as the other dog walks away, he retreats to his bed”. In other words, describing the behavior problem in terms of what the behavior actually looks like allows us to modify the behavior that we do not want into a behavior we do want. But if we rely on what we think the animal might be feeling, it leads us down a completely different path; one that now treats the dog as if it were a human thus marginalizing the dog. Besides not being fair to the dog, it will likely lead to the wrong type of treatment plan. In this type of situation, anthropomorphism is inappropriate.
On the other hand, if we are just having a friendly discussion about our dogs, why not speak in a manner that we understand? We are comfortable attributing emotions to others because we have empathy (we are able to set ourselves in the place of another) and we make assumptions by comparing another’s behavior to our own in similar states of mind. While we cannot know for sure what our dog might be thinking or feeling, our dogs often display expressions or behaviors that resemble our own. For example, I have a little mutt terrier that, when you pat your legs and move your feet in a little hip-hop, wiggles about, play bows, and genuinely seems to be happy complete with a smile on his face!! Am I humanizing the dog? Perhaps. Am I disregarding the true nature of the animal? Who knows? (How can I be sure what he is really feeling??) But what I do know is that I am not attempting to change his behavior and I see nothing wrong in telling you that I think he is having fun and is happy when he does this. When others observe this behavior, they also agree that he is happy. It is a language and expression we all understand. In this type of situation, anthropomorphism seems to be rather harmless.
So, back to the question: Is anthropomorphism bad? Answer: It depends. If we are attempting to modify behavior, then yes it has a real downside for the dog. If we are joining in friendly conversation, then it is perhaps silly, but likely not bad.
&