The pedigree system and domestic Dogs

[naitche]

After looking into if and how this works using the K.Cs as the study, I'm very  sure the opposite is true, that the K.Cs have, over time, shaped the expectations and values of their environment in a process that  gains momentum. Conditions increasingly come to support the end result of taking Dogs out of their environment.

Designer dogs, conditions of dogs rather than dogs for a real purpose an obvious example. A process of making the environment over to reflect their own values. Removing  and suppressing others.

Reaction to whats 'out there' - The K.Cs themselves may bring in new rules or protocols in response to environmental pressure for change. Its almost invariably to impose further limitations on membership or environment.

There are a few recent exceptions. How effectively the membership will  make use of those changes, or censure those who try, is yet to be seen. And for how long. 

The instruction given by the organisation is still to refuse recognition of those. Just as the origin of breed club has just done with the Dalmation.

The 'favour' to be found in the K.C environment still belongs to those who follow that instruction. And they block and censure any who try an opposing direction.

Edited October 19, 2018 by naitche

[naitche]

The 'identity' of the organisation and that direction to remove dogs is is 'fixed' by measuring the value of the organisation against what lies outside it.

Refusing recognition of what lies outside, As an organism, It will try its best not to respond to it. When  forced, any response is generally going to be defensive or offensive.

The process by which dogs will be removed varies according to the culture its operating on, but the instruction to do remains.

Such an identity seeks growth by enforcing its own conditions on its environment, rather than accepting and working in diverse conditions and gaining acceptance or favour by demonstration of its value. 

It imposes its own conditions on its environment.

Its demonstrated by any cultural group that perceives value in its environment based on its own condition. And by extension, its position there.

The effects on the environment should not be under estimated because they are huge, but insidious over time.

They are effective. Based on the truths or reality of real conditions and the perspectives of those. They demand acceptance of their conditions from the environment, instead of recognition of value to it.

Equates recognition as a valued/viable part of some thing,

With acceptance of conditions -  that in a healthy environment only occurs with value demonstrated, where demonstrated.

Other conditions/identities/environments are discredited to achieve acceptance and imposition of its own.

The instruction of measuring an identities value by its condition in opposition to what lies out side its 'self' is a destructive mistake.

One that is being repeated and often  encouraged by the various cultures at work in Humanity.

It just may be, We need Dogs to remind us of how things work by their nature.

 

 

 

Edited October 20, 2018 by naitche

[naitche]

This is an old hypothesis that was ignored.  Looks like a big mistake to me.

One argument used to discredit it was that humanity ( and the various cultures of its make up)  have no nervous system.

Well what is internet? Have we developed one?

If we view Identity as a space,  the environment for all it contains,  it ties in many disciplines of science and still works.

It may take away the sense of importance some hold. Its not an attractive idea for most. 

It gives new importance as individuals for the value and meaning of response ability to your own reality, and its role in evolution. 

And the role of 'Faith' in conditions  and their imposition to halt it. By denying that ability to respond in other manner. Response is 'fixed' and non adaptive to changing conditions.

Edited October 26, 2018 by naitche

[naitche]

If identity is a space, it must be defined by its direction.   Identity is fluid. 

Until that identity defines  its 'self,'  by its condition. Once 'fixed' in that position, Other directions are closed from that point.

As long as that identified culture distinguishes its 'self'  from its surroundings by the conditions that keep them apart. 

These theories taken in their entirety support this.

A perspective best seen with 'you' as one point. Your own identity as an organism is a  condition,   'fixed'  by its genetics  ( or belief in the condition to be maintained. Your organised body is your evolution complete).

Everything beyond your own self is environment. Your condition is a small part of another whole. How It  will be defined is dependent the culture you  identify  with.

What 'culture' you belong to, and how inclusive that is to other cultures. Cultures set conditions by agreement.

Agreement is achieved by what conditions can be  recognised by a culture and the diversity it allows in deciding what belongs, or what does not, to preserve the integrity of the cultural identity.

So cultures behaves like genes, and how inclusive a culture is to its environment and conditions decides its purpose or  direction as part of humanity. 

Culture seems to decide the conditions of Humanity that can/will be recognised as part of a  common self that can  be worked with to maximise potential.

What it accepts, to take response- ability  for, in providing demonstrations of positive direction shared in common.

The manifestation of conditions permitted to maximise Human potential, Or decide it.

 

 

Edited December 22, 2018 by naitche