...argument with humans? I don't know if this has already been discussed, but it's had my wondering for a while...
Only dogs with good temperament (personality, basically) are "fit" to be bred.
So, if a dog is violent or otherwise possesses undesirable personality traits, it is not to be bred.
This is to prevent the continuation of "bad blood". Basically, an undesirable parent will/may have undesirable pups.
Does this logic carry over to humans?
For instance... some people argue that people are inherently evil. They cannot help doing the things they do, because it's in their blood. Their parents were bad, so now they are bad. (nature)
Others argue that they just had a bad childhood, or were raised wrong. (nurture)
But if it's already been proven that "nature" makes certain dogs undesirable, what's to say humans don't work the same way?
Sorry if this has already been discussed.
But I'd like someone else's opinion on this.
Only dogs with good temperament (personality, basically) are "fit" to be bred.
So, if a dog is violent or otherwise possesses undesirable personality traits, it is not to be bred.
This is to prevent the continuation of "bad blood". Basically, an undesirable parent will/may have undesirable pups.
Does this logic carry over to humans?
For instance... some people argue that people are inherently evil. They cannot help doing the things they do, because it's in their blood. Their parents were bad, so now they are bad. (nature)
Others argue that they just had a bad childhood, or were raised wrong. (nurture)
But if it's already been proven that "nature" makes certain dogs undesirable, what's to say humans don't work the same way?
Sorry if this has already been discussed.
But I'd like someone else's opinion on this.