[ALawPoker]

I always enjoy how dogs can recognize each other as other dogs (or however they interpret it; at least, they react the same way) no matter how unique the dog breed. It's still another dog. I mean, obviously they have their ways to do it, scent or just inexplicable instinct or whatever. That's not important. But it's funny that from my perspective "that" shouldn't equal "that," but the dogs don't miss a beat.

My question is, do humans instinctively recognize various dog breeds (even when they seem very different in appearance) as also "dog"? Or is it only through experience and learning that we recognize them as the same thing?

I'm trying to think back to when I was a kid, and if there was ever a time when I wondered "what animal is that" when it was indeed a dog I didn't recognize as that species.

I think you learn what a dog is so early and so gradually that what I'm talking about is sort of moot, since by the time you can communicate and remember things, you've learned all different breeds as "dog," even if you had to learn them close to individually, or if you basically learned that the animal the human has as a pet is very likely to be either a cat or a dog and you've learned the behavioral differences between the two.

I'd like to see an experiment where some human lives in captivity until adulthood, and I guess he'd need to be taught things to help his mind develop or whatever, but he's never introduced to dogs. What exactly he learns about other animals is debatable and probably important, but not necessary to elaborate on here. Then he meets a golden retriever. This is "dog" to him. Would he recognize other breeds of dog as also "dog," or would they seem like a different animal to him? Some breeds might be similar enough to seem like the same thing, but then would there be a point where maybe a terrier seems like a different animal, or a pug, or a poodle, or some mini toy dog thing? How exactly would this person interpret different breeds of dogs?

If he would recognize the pug as also a dog, that just seems remarkable to me (though I wouldn't be overly surprised either). I guess a lot would also depend on how much time the person had to observe the animals, as well as how naturally perceptive he might be. If he saw the animals sitting still for 30 seconds he'd be less likely to interpret them as the same species than if he had a lot of time to interact with them and observe their behavior patterns.

Maybe I'm just not seeing something and this is a silly question. But I'm real curious what people on here think. Our minds are great at reading patterns, and I wouldn't be too surprised if we automatically connect the dots between the different dog breeds. But it still seems remarkable if we can do that (dog breeds vary SO much and vary based on human intervention, which seems to add a new element to the way, say, different types of bears might vary in the wild... maybe we're more equipped to handle our environment than we are to handle our environment after we ourselves manipulate it).