A Houndstory of Philosophy
Dogs in the History of Philosophy.
1. Dogs as Symbols of Virtue In Ancient Worlds
Diogenes of Sinope (404 BC — 323 BC), a prominent figure in Greek philosophy and one of the founders of Cynic philosophy, famously used the dog as a symbol and ideal of the Cynic practice. Diogenes championed a life in accord with nature, free from societal conventions, and he admired the honesty, self-sufficiency, and freedom of dogs. He is reputed to have embraced the nickname “Diogenes the Dog,” taking pride in the dog’s ability to live in the moment, unburdened by societal pretenses or material concerns. He is reputed to have said something along the lines of:
“I fawn on those who give me anything, I bark at those who refuse, and I set my teeth in rascals.”
This quote, though not verbatim from any single source, captures the essence of how Diogenes viewed dogs and why he chose to emulate them. It reflects his admiration for the straightforwardness, independence, and honesty of dogs. Dogs, to Diogenes, lived naturally and without pretense, embodying the virtues he believed were necessary for a good human life.
The Greek philosopher Plato (428 BC — 348 BC), on the other hand, admires the dog’s ability to blend opposites of fierceness and gentleness, using it as a model for the guardians of the state who must be protective yet amicable towards their own people. In Book II of The Republic (380 BC), Plato has Socrates comparing the virtue embodied by the guardian class in charge of protecting the ideal republic to the virtue of dogs:
“Must not our dogs, however, be a model of the four-footed type of guardian? I mean they are loyal and good-natured to those they know and the opposite to those they do not know.”
This comparison effectively conveys the importance of wisdom, loyalty, and protective instincts in the guardians of the city-state. Plato uses the dog analogy to suggest that just as dogs are naturally adept at distinguishing friend from foe without being taught, so too should the guardians be naturally inclined towards recognizing and protecting the interests of the state and its citizens. This analogy underscores the philosophical idea that the best protectors of the state are those who possess a natural ability to discern the good and act in its interest, embodying both the protective fierceness and the loving nature required to guard what is precious.
2. Ethical Considerations and Animal Welfare
Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832), an English philosopher, jurist, and social reformer regarded as the founder of modern utilitarianism, includes an often-cited reflection on animals, including dogs, in The Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789), challenging the moral consideration of animals based on their ability to suffer:
“The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?”
Working on opposite sides of the Atlantic, Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860), a German philosopher known for his pessimism and philosophical clarity, articulated similar views about dogs and other animals. He had a fondness for animals, and his writings reflect deep thoughts on their nature and our relationship with them. In his work, “The Basis of Morality”(1840) Schopenhauer discusses the concept of compassion and extends it to animals, emphasizing the unjust treatment they often endure at the hands of humans:
“Compassion for animals is intimately associated with goodness of character, and it may be confidently asserted that he who is cruel to animals cannot be a good man.”
This quote encapsulates Schopenhauer’s view on the moral implications of our interactions with animals and, by extension, acknowledges the value and significance of the loyalty and companionship dogs provide. In The World as Will and Representation (1818) he writes about dogs:
“The fidelity of a dog is a precious gift demanding no less binding moral responsibilities than the friendship of a human being.”
Here we have Schopenhauer’s appreciation for the loyalty and fidelity of dogs, highlighting the deep bond that can form between humans and dogs. More important, it underscores the ethical obligations that arise from this bond, suggesting that the loyalty of a dog is not just a simple trait but a profound gift that carries with it moral responsibilities for the human recipient. Schopenhauer’s perspective invites reflection on the nature of our relationships with animals and calls for a respectful and ethical engagement with them, recognizing the depth and significance of the loyalty dogs offer.
3. Dogs and Human Interconnectedness
Bridging the ethical considerations highlighted by Schopenhauer to the intricate co-evolution of dogs and humans discussed by contemporary philosopher Donna Haraway (1944), we see a continuum in philosophical thought that not only acknowledges the value of animal life but also delves into the profound interconnectedness of species. In The Companion Species Manifesto: Dogs, People, and Significant Otherness (2003), Donna Haraway writes of dogs:
“Species of all kinds, living and not, are consequent on a subject- and object-shaping dance of encounters. Working dogs, guide dogs, bomb-sniffing dogs, wild dogs, dirt-eating dogs, dogs of all kinds, and their people are the result of reciprocal induction within a subject- and object-shaping dance of encounters.”
This quote underscores Haraway’s view of dogs not merely as pets or animals but as significant others with whom humans share complex, intertwined lives. Her work emphasizes the reciprocal nature of relationships between humans and dogs, where both species influence and shape each other’s existence, challenging traditional notions of hierarchy and separation between human and non-human beings.
Finally, in his book The Philosopher’s Dog (2005), Raimond Gaita (1946) directly engages with dogs and other animals in his life to explore profound philosophical themes, including the nature of friendship, love, death, and morality. Gaita’s work is a poignant reflection on what it means to live with and learn from dogs, offering rich, narrative-driven philosophical insights into the human condition through the lens of our relationships with animals. He captures the essence of dog-ness here:
“Dogs are not our whole life, but they make our lives whole.”
It succinctly encapsulates the sentiment that, although dogs may be a part of our lives, their presence and companionship significantly enrich our human experience, making our lives feel more complete and meaningful. Gaita’s work is filled with such insights, drawing from personal experiences to explore the depth of connection that can exist between humans and dogs, underscoring how these relationships can illuminate aspects of love, ethics, and the nature of being.
