The yellow rat snake that may enjoy some human contact.

[smy_749]

Originally Posted by franks

My two cents on the argument is that (like doberman said) people seek affirmation, not information. Most of us subscribe to the point of view that explains what we feel comfortable with, whether it concerns politics, religion, or snake love. I think it is clear here that neither side will convince the other of their truth.

I agree with this....to a point :P

Because me personally, I wish my snakes would feel affection. I love cats, and its enjoyable to have a pet which shows that type of behavior honestly. However, at the same time I'm not convinced in the slightest when it comes to snakes, although I wish more than anything that they loved me. (((


Also, pics or it didn't happen with the birthday card.

[KORBIN5895]

Originally Posted by smy_749

I agree with this....to a point :P

Because me personally, I wish my snakes would feel affection. I love cats, and its enjoyable to have a pet which shows that type of behavior honestly. However, at the same time I'm not convinced in the slightest when it comes to snakes, although I wish more than anything that they loved me. (((


Also, pics or it didn't happen with the birthday card.

I love cats too! They taste amazing with bulls eye BBQ sauce!

[franks]

Well we all believe things that we do not want to believe, that is not what I meant by "feel comfortable with." I meant more along the lines that we seem to believe what we believe and admitting to ourselves we may be wrong is uncomfortable at times. And you caught me on the card. I do agree with you though, and I have had some extremely "affectionate" lizards. That is why my best friend is still my dog: because he brings me boxers when I get out of the shower.

[smy_749]

Originally Posted by KORBIN5895

I love cats too! They taste amazing with bulls eye BBQ sauce!

Never tried full grown cat, but kitten isn't bad and my snakes seem to like it as well. 2 birds with 1 stone.

[smy_749]

Originally Posted by franks

Well we all believe things that we do not want to believe, that is not what I meant by "feel comfortable with." I meant more along the lines that we seem to believe what we believe and admitting to ourselves we may be wrong is uncomfortable at times. And you caught me on the card. I do agree with you though, and I have had some extremely "affectionate" lizards. That is why my best friend is still my dog: because he brings me boxers when I get out of the shower.

Thats pretty hilarious. lol

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by DOBERMAN

Look mikoh. I'm not here to get into a pissing match with you. I have offered some insight and opinions as to why either side of the coin, whether it be science or philosophy, both have merit in topics of this nature. I haven't taken a side. It looks like you have though, and are expecting me to do the same. My intuition is that you would rather banter than explore.
And as far as being pseudo-intellectual, I have already beaten you to the punch. If you look at my prior posts, I included myself into that statement.
You suffer from "confirmation bias". You will only recognize and appreciate evidence that supports your position. All other ideas to the contrary will be ignored. It's like a virus mikoh and it limits your ability to learn. In fact it is a plague run amok on most internet forums including this one.

From Wikipedia
Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. For example, in reading about gun control, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.

Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts.

As soon as I read "From Wikipedia" I knew your argument is garbage. Why may you ask? Because Wikipedia can be edited by ANYONE at ANYTIME. It's not a real source for information.

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by franks

My two cents on the argument is that (like doberman said) people seek affirmation, not information. Most of us subscribe to the point of view that explains what we feel comfortable with, whether it concerns politics, religion, or snake love. I think it is clear here that neither side will convince the other of their truth.

I'd like to believe you but your last sentence just isn't right. Science HAS proven to date (not saying it can't change) that snakes operate without emotions as we perceive them.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by KORBIN5895

Are you telling me that we shouldn't call people what they are? If someone is doing something foolish we would call them a fool. If someone is picking on another person we call them a bully. When someone can't formulate a legitimate scientific argument to support their view but instead use pointless and totally irrelevant stories and unknown sources ghats pretty asinine and really stupid. Support your theory with facts first and observations seconds.

No, we do not need to refer to someone as a fool if s/he is acting foolishly. The most accurate comment would be that such a person is acting foolishly just as a human acting like a duck is not a duck. According to this site's poorly enforced rules, we do not have the privilege of insulting others but are required to be polite.

I asked for people's interpretations of two snake behaviours that I found odd. I didn't intend to encourage a meaningless exchange of insults. Rather than attack the views of another, why not explain your own interpretations of the question that this thread is named after and provide whatever sort of evidence you see fit to substantiate your viewpoint? May I suggest that you let me know what your interpretation of those two snake behaviours are, please.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

I'd like to believe you but your last sentence just isn't right. Science HAS proven to date (not saying it can't change) that snakes operate without emotions as we perceive them.

Would you be so kind as to substantiate your claim with scientific evidence? As well, how would you interpret the two snake behaviours that I outlined at the very beginning of this thread?

[Cory]

Also, I'd like to clarify something. When I suggested that the behaviour of reaching up with its body toward my hand might indicate that Lily the yellow rat snake may enjoy a type of touch I never suggested that Lily was engaged in any moral decision-making exercise. Instead, I assume that snakes can feel both pleasure and pain and can act with both attraction and aversion. As a human caring for animals, I want to best provide for their needs. Some snakes do exhibit some social tendencies such as mating, group denning, and following each other's pheromone trails when exiting their wintering dens for the summer. I am certain that I am unable to provide the exact natural environment for this snake but would like to make its life as good and comfortable as possible. If it turns out that the snake's behaviours were social cues then I would like to know what they mean, hence this request for interpretations. I am more than certain that the snake doesn't "love" anything but that doesn't mean that I do not have an obligation as a good pet steward to try to provide for the animal's needs. That's the entire gist of my request.

[Amadeus]

This thread is preposterous.

[Mikoh4792]

Originally Posted by Amadeus

This thread is preposterous.

Amen.

The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 10 characters.

[Ourobouros]

I think it's fair to say most/if not all animals experience fear, which is technically an emotion... And it's useful in self preservation (generally speaking... We all know what deer in headlights refers to but there will always be exceptions to the rule). Of course I'm no scientist but it is something to at least consider...

And my apologies if I'm repeating something already mentioned.. Saw the multitude of grumpy responses and didn't feel like risking having to sort through 8 pages of that.. I'll take a proverbial back hand for being lazy and sticking my nose in here after the fact because I felt like it.

[smy_749]

Originally Posted by Ourobouros

I think it's fair to say most/if not all animals experience fear, which is technically an emotion... And it's useful in self preservation (generally speaking... We all know what deer in headlights refers to but there will always be exceptions to the rule). Of course I'm no scientist but it is something to at least consider...

And my apologies if I'm repeating something already mentioned.. Saw the multitude of grumpy responses and didn't feel like risking having to sort through 8 pages of that.. I'll take a proverbial back hand for being lazy and sticking my nose in here after the fact because I felt like it.

Explain the difference between fear, and genetically programmed to flee from potential threats. Even plants can curl up or close when predators touch them...But again, theres no way to prove that all animals feel 'fear' like we do. Maybe its easier to prove in dogs or cats, chimps, who make it clear, but reptiles don't show facial expressions or anything...

[Ourobouros]

Originally Posted by smy_749

Explain the difference between fear, and genetically programmed to flee from potential threats. Even plants can curl up or close when predators touch them...But again, theres no way to prove that all animals feel 'fear' like we do. Maybe its easier to prove in dog but what hence cats, chimps, who make it clear, but reptiles don't show facial expressions or anything...

Symptoms of anxiety suits fear quite well. Chemical reactions induced by changes in the environment are what spurn "emotions" and it's really not the same as inadvertent physical reactions like the reflex to pull your hand away from a hot stove though it's all governed by the brain. It's not about whether or not we think an animal fears dying like we do (generalized) but what changes in the body when facing a potential threat. You can feel fear without thinking about it. The fact that it's in the genes doesn't negate the argument that an animal can feel fear, or any other primitive emotion, like aggression.

The science of Fear | Laboratory News

Factoring Fear: What Scares Us and Why: Scientific American

Reptile Emotions - Texas A&M Veterinary Medicine & Biomedical Sciences