The New Scientist magazine has just come out with an entire issue about how our connection to animals may have been the key to our survival as a species as is depicted in this brief animated explanation. I think it is momentous that a respected magazine like New Scientist has recognized the importance of animals in our lives, even if, as they say as useful tools. I wonder though about the compassionate connection and how that may have been involved as well. Certainly, survival is primary, but I wonder about that is interconnected with a more loving bond. For instance, when the Russians were breeding fox for fur coats, they inadvertently were selecting for foxes that were easier to catch, more friendly with people etc. simply because they were the easiest to work with. Over generations, they ended up breeding foxes that were also adaptable as pets and created a entire new industry of foxes as pets. This selective breeding for domesticity occurred in a relatively short period of time. Perhaps our ancestors also, inadvertently, selectively bred all our domestic animals for increased ability to work with and increased friendliness.
I would be interested in your thoughts based on this brief animated description.
It seems that, what Harvard Entomologist, E. O. Wilson, has called “biophilia” is true. We are innately and intimately connected to all of life. It seems that it makes sense to preserve all life and re-create a world that makes that our priority. May all our thoughts and actions help support this revival of a nature and compassion based society.