It's Raining Cats and Dogs...

In response to Israel Diaz's question, "Is it 'natural' for a dog or cat to be used as a pet?"...

     First of all, as we have learned in class, we should identify what is meant by the word "natural" in this question, for often people substitute it for about four greater meanings. So, is keeping a cat or dog as a pet morally wrong? This is quite a difficult question to answer. Today, the cats and dogs people keep as pets are domesticated, and these animals might have a difficult time living in the wild on their own if they had to. Obviously, there are some "outdoor cats" which would be alright, but for the most part it seems that the two species have adapted to enjoy and need the comforts of a nice home. Abusing animals is evidently morally wrong, but it is up to individual interpretation if keeping animals such as these is wrong. People will argue that humans think of themselves too highly and should not enslave other animals to keep as pets. But, I believe it is alright if we do as long as we treat them kindly and respectfully. It would just be cruel to release some domesticated animals out into the wild where they would not be able to survive.
     Another interpretation of the word "natural" is human-made, and in a sense, keeping animals does appear to be a human-made notion. After all, we domesticated animals hundreds of years ago by keeping them as our pets, and I cannot think of any other creature who keeps pets like humans do. So, is our tendency to keep pets based off of our levels of intelligence, sentience, memory, sense of self, etc? I believe it must be. In my last post I responded to Jenny's question about what animal would take the place of humans if we were not so superior, and I had a difficult time answering. It just seems that there is no animal that would have the ability to dominate to the extent that humans do, and therefore perhaps be able to keep pets. There are animals on the planet who use "lesser" animals to their benefit, but is this the same as humans keeping a cat or a dog? It seems that animals keep other animals for some physical or biological need, whereas humans keep pets for emotional reasons. Perhaps most animals do not keep pets because they do not have the capacity to feel emotions to the extent that humans do. Additionally, it is interesting that the more popular pets amongst humans seems to be those who can feel emotions similar to what we do, like cats or dogs.
     Keeping cats or dogs as pets is not uncommon, as one interpretation of "natural" goes, but does it upset a balance in the world? This is hard to answer as well, for humans have kept animals for so long that it is hard to imagine a time that we did not. However, I believe that it does not upset such a balance. Cats and dogs are relatively loyal animals, and it just so happens that over time we have domesticated them to become loyal to humans. But, this is just how history has played itself out, and there have not seemed to be any severe consequences of it.
     So, it is clear that there are many different interpretations of this question, and I hope I have adequately answered all of them. But in response, I offer you a few more questions...  What is one animal that you believe could never be domesticated for humans to use as a pet? What would the world be like if humans never kept cats or dogs as pets? What kind of different qualities do you think the animals would have, living in the "wild"?