The Next Frontier?

[JoXie411]

I cant speak for Brody, but for myself, quoting facts are never a form of belittling.

Your comment to be can be taken as belittling. I understand Science and biology. I’ve actually studied it in collage and have studied as a vet tech as well so yes I understand science but it doesn’t change my belief system.

I’ve never wanted to pull my I’ve studied in this field card because it’s demeaning imo

 

[Kristen Wilkins]

I cant speak for Brody, but for myself, quoting facts are never a form of belittling. When someone comes at me with the emotion arguement I just go off the assumption they quite litterally dont understand. Your need for their to be a bond i a purely human sentiment. The fact of the matter is your chameleon doesnt need that bond. Its cool that they trust us, hell even I take that as an achievement, and we can derive what ever human emotion we want from that but it ours and ours alone.


I did undergrad at BYU-I. This was a common sentiment among religous people. How on earth could something created by God not feel emotion, and then to have science just explain how humans feel and interact as pure chemicals. This sentiment I understand and to some degree will always feel theres an underlying element we cant comprehend. Regardless, animals, if you choose to not regard us as such, are much less complex creatures.

Agreed it’s such a hard subject . As @JacksJill said there’s not a lot of research so much unknown .

 

[Jammoos]

I think we have trouble grasping it because it's similar to trying to imagine what we'd be like w/o abstract thought. Everyone wants to believe their pet loves and trusts them. And that's completely understandable, I fully believe a chameleon can "Trust" you but I think that's less of an emotion and more of a "Hey this thing hasn't tried to hurt me, so I can probably wander closer to them to bask or get food" which is something many creatures show.

This is important though because it's sadly common to mistake an actual issue w/ the chameleon just liking you or being a sassy, independent cham. In the original topic, this was brought up because a chameleon owner thought their chameleon loved them and was lonely when he left. When in reality it sounded like a case of poor enclosure setup and a potential eye infection.

We shouldn't point fingers here. I think it's perfectly fine to love your chameleon and feel a bond between you and your cham, but as Koba and Brody said (in what I thought was a very respectful and informative way) chameleons don't think the way we do, and instead of arguing w/ someone over it (regardless of what side of the fence they're on) we should acknowledge that and be mindful of it.

We all love our chameleons. Of course, we all want our babies to love us back, but their minds really don't work at all like ours. Their trust is very different from our trust, and their "bonds" are very different than ours. I'm sure they see us in a very special and unique way that maybe wild chameleons wouldn't see humans. I don't see any reason why we should get upset because someone tried to explain that to us.

 

[Beman]

I cant speak for Brody, but for myself, quoting facts are never a form of belittling. When someone comes at me with the emotion arguement I just go off the assumption they quite litterally dont understand. Your need for their to be a bond i a purely human sentiment. The fact of the matter is your chameleon doesnt need that bond. Its cool that they trust us, hell even I take that as an achievement, and we can derive what ever human emotion we want from that but it ours and ours alone.

I do feel that the manor in which you express yourself can come across as belittling. As far as Brody, he and I can agree to disagree on this topic as well but he also does not make me feel like I am less then for what I believe. I think it is the fact that you automatically go off the assumption that we just don't understand.

I do not have a need for a bond... THERE IS A BOND. Again the way in which your saying that is belittling. Yes, the chameleon does need their to be a bond. This makes it easier on it if there is a level of trust between cham and keeper. When it comes to cleaning alone this is important. I have been through a lot with Beman in the last few months from stripping his cage of plants and cleaning every day. It has pulled at our bond but the fact that he has that level of trust for me as his keeper is what made it easier on him with all the changes to his environment and me constantly cleaning.

It is your position and need to be right. That heaven forbid there be a grey area. I understand the need to correct someone when they are saying their cham loves to cuddle or falls asleep on them. I fully understand that. But the need to push your view on those of us that are good keepers and know the difference is absurd.

 

[Beman]

I think we have trouble grasping it because it's similar to trying to imagine what we'd be like w/o abstract thought. Everyone wants to believe their pet loves and trusts them. And that's completely understandable, I fully believe a chameleon can "Trust" you but I think that's less of an emotion and more of a "Hey this thing hasn't tried to hurt me, so I can probably wander closer to them to bask or get food" which is something many creatures show.

This is important though because it's sadly common to mistake an actual issue w/ the chameleon just liking you or being a sassy, independent cham. In the original topic, this was brought up because a chameleon owner thought their chameleon loved them and was lonely when he left. When in reality it sounded like a case of poor enclosure setup and a potential eye infection.

We shouldn't point fingers here. I think it's perfectly fine to love your chameleon and feel a bond between you and your cham, but as Koba and Brody said (in what I thought was a very respectful and informative way) chameleons don't think the way we do, and instead of arguing w/ someone over it (regardless of what side of the fence they're on) we should acknowledge that and be mindful of it.

We all love our chameleons. Of course, we all want our babies to love us back, but their minds really don't work at all like ours. Their trust is very different from our trust, and their "bonds" are very different than ours. I'm sure they see us in a very special and unique way that maybe wild chameleons wouldn't see humans. I don't see any reason why we should get upset because someone tried to explain that to us.

Your new here... this has been an ongoing debate the last year that I have been here and I am sure prior to me as well. I have no problem with the explanation. I have a problem with the lack of understanding on behalf of those that like to force it on others. It is not black and white. There is a middle ground. And this is not us upset lol. This is actually a healthy debate between us. I may pick at Koba and Brody but I also understand their point of view. I would like for him to acknowledge mine and that is all.

 

[Brodybreaux25]

 

[Kristen Wilkins]

I think we have trouble grasping it because it's similar to trying to imagine what we'd be like w/o abstract thought. Everyone wants to believe their pet loves and trusts them. And that's completely understandable, I fully believe a chameleon can "Trust" you but I think that's less of an emotion and more of a "Hey this thing hasn't tried to hurt me, so I can probably wander closer to them to bask or get food" which is something many creatures show.

This is important though because it's sadly common to mistake an actual issue w/ the chameleon just liking you or being a sassy, independent cham. In the original topic, this was brought up because a chameleon owner thought their chameleon loved them and was lonely when he left. When in reality it sounded like a case of poor enclosure setup and a potential eye infection.

We shouldn't point fingers here. I think it's perfectly fine to love your chameleon and feel a bond between you and your cham, but as Koba and Brody said (in what I thought was a very respectful and informative way) chameleons don't think the way we do, and instead of arguing w/ someone over it (regardless of what side of the fence they're on) we should acknowledge that and be mindful of it.

We all love our chameleons. Of course, we all want our babies to love us back, but their minds really don't work at all like ours. Their trust is very different from our trust, and their "bonds" are very different than ours. I'm sure they see us in a very special and unique way that maybe wild chameleons wouldn't see humans. I don't see any reason why we should get upset because someone tried to explain that to us.

Well said !!.

 

[Kristen Wilkins]

Your new here... this has been an ongoing debate the last year that I have been here and I am sure prior to me as well. I have no problem with the explanation. I have a problem with the lack of understanding on behalf of those that like to force it on others. It is not black and white. There is a middle ground. And this is not us upset lol. This is actually a healthy debate between us. I may pick at Koba and Brody but I also understand their point of view. I would like for him to acknowledge mine and that is all.

Or 5+ it’s actually been longer lol . Just been that long since I been here .

 

[Kaizen]

I have no empirical evidence to weigh in here, but my chams certainly don’t love me; in fact, I’m pretty sure they hate my guts.

Seriously though, there’s some real room for interesting philosophical debate here. For instance, the concept of ‘love’ is often taken to involve activity: love, it is often said, isn’t merely an emotion, it’s the activity of putting someone else’s needs before your own for the sole benefit of that person’s happiness. This is merely one view of the concept, but some clarity here might go a long way. For instance, if we’re simply talking about the result of brain processes (hormones, etc.) of the sort only seen in, eg, primates, then anything lacking the relevant hardware will, ipso facto, be incapable of love. My point is that terms such as ‘emotional bond, love, caring, trust, etc’ require a lot more conceptual unpacking before any interested parties can argue about them. Come up with a tentative set of criteria for ‘love’, agreed upon by all parties, then evaluate individuals according to those criteria. My guess is that the antagonists in this discussion are talking past one another.

 

[JacksJill]

@Beman don't get mad at me but I have to point this out. It is not always the men that take the emotional side of the argument. I have been shouted down by male members of this forum in the past for not embracing the idea of chameleon intelligence and deep emotion. While I stood (metaphorically shoulder to shoulder) with another female member in opposition. Don't get me wrong I just love and respect them for what they are and don't need them to be anything more. I'm not saying you do but clearly we see that here often.
^^Agree it is a question of definition and that is going to vary by keeper.

 

[Kaizen]

Further to my last,

It could easily turn out that, while incapable of loving me in the way my wife does, my dogs love me in a dog-way. What this amounts to, I have no idea, but I see no conceptual problem here. That being the case, there might be a chameleon way of loving—it’s just that it’s very different from our way. Personally, I think the strictly neuroscientific account of the emotions in particular, and consciousness in general is in need of some conceptual clarification.

 

[Beman]

@Beman don't get mad at me but I have to point this out. It is not always the men that take the emotional side of the argument. I have been shouted down by male members of this forum in the past for not embracing the idea of chameleon intelligence and deep emotion. While I stood (metaphorically shoulder to shoulder) with another female member in opposition. Don't get me wrong I just love and respect them for what they are and don't need them to be anything more. I'm not saying you do but clearly we see that here often.
^^Agree it is a question of definition and that is going to vary by keeper.

I could never get mad at you Jillian. I honestly see all sides completely. I just find that the men seem to toss the "emotional" women under the bus lol. I know it goes both directions though as well.

 

[Kristen Wilkins]

I have no empirical evidence to weigh in here, but my chams certainly don’t love me; in fact, I’m pretty sure they hate my guts.

Seriously though, there’s some real room for interesting philosophical debate here. For instance, the concept of ‘love’ is often taken to involve activity: love, it is often said, isn’t merely an emotion, it’s the activity of putting someone else’s needs before your own for the sole benefit of that person’s happiness. This is merely one view of the concept, but some clarity here might go a long way. For instance, if we’re simply talking about the result of brain processes (hormones, etc.) of the sort only seen in, eg, primates, then anything lacking the relevant hardware will, ipso facto, be incapable of love. My point is that terms such as ‘emotional bond, love, caring, trust, etc’ require a lot more conceptual unpacking before any interested parties can argue about them. Come up with a tentative set of criteria for ‘love’, agreed upon by all parties, then evaluate individuals according to those criteria. My guess is that the antagonists in this discussion are talking past one another.

I don’t know about love I sure know they have negative Behaviour to things . For instance @Brodybreaux25 chameleon's do not like pictures out side . As he said they show no stress at all , hands over head in and out of their condos etc , till out side . Why is that ?? why is that scare instinct only in that space with that particular circumstance ??. Why did Beman have a reaction to Becca’s Polish ?? Once it was off his normal behavior?? Should it be called behavior or instinct ??. Why do some chameleon’s refuse roaches ?? Or pick only Supers ?? Why is there threatening colors ?? So they see certain colors as a automatic threat ??. Is this all purely instinctual ?? I have no idea I’m just throwing this out there . It’s all fascinating .

 

[Beman]

I think we have trouble grasping it because it's similar to trying to imagine what we'd be like w/o abstract thought. Everyone wants to believe their pet loves and trusts them. And that's completely understandable, I fully believe a chameleon can "Trust" you but I think that's less of an emotion and more of a "Hey this thing hasn't tried to hurt me, so I can probably wander closer to them to bask or get food" which is something many creatures show.

This is important though because it's sadly common to mistake an actual issue w/ the chameleon just liking you or being a sassy, independent cham. In the original topic, this was brought up because a chameleon owner thought their chameleon loved them and was lonely when he left. When in reality it sounded like a case of poor enclosure setup and a potential eye infection.

We shouldn't point fingers here. I think it's perfectly fine to love your chameleon and feel a bond between you and your cham, but as Koba and Brody said (in what I thought was a very respectful and informative way) chameleons don't think the way we do, and instead of arguing w/ someone over it (regardless of what side of the fence they're on) we should acknowledge that and be mindful of it.

We all love our chameleons. Of course, we all want our babies to love us back, but their minds really don't work at all like ours. Their trust is very different from our trust, and their "bonds" are very different than ours. I'm sure they see us in a very special and unique way that maybe wild chameleons wouldn't see humans. I don't see any reason why we should get upset because someone tried to explain that to us.

I would like to go back... Now my first line of "your new here... " I did not mean this in a negative manor. Just that once your around for awhile you will see that us regulars on the forum actually get along quite well lol. We all enjoy a good debate and speaking for myself at least I respect everyone's opinion and honestly I love hearing their opinions. Yours included.

 

[Beman]

I don’t know about love I sure know they have negative Behaviour to things . For instance @Brodybreaux25 chameleon's do not like pictures out side . As he said they show no stress at all , hands over head in and out of their condos etc , till out side . Why is that ?? why is that scare instinct only in that space with that particular circumstance ??. Why did Beman have a reaction to Becca’s Polish ?? Once it was off his normal behavior?? Should it be called behavior or instinct ??. Why do some chameleon’s refuse roaches ?? Or pick only Supers ?? Why is there threatening colors ?? So they see certain colors as a automatic threat ??. Is this all purely instinctual ?? I have no idea I’m just throwing this out there . It’s all fascinating .

I spent 3 hours trying to paint my dang fingernails too.... only to have to remove it all. As soon as I took it off he was totally fine. And it was like a pale pink color nothing striking

 

[Kaizen]

Ok, I’ll get this started:

Def 1. Love just is the release of oxytocin paired with some other neurobiological activity, etc.

Results: this definition assumes a highly reductive account of love. One might, for instance, argue that love is the result of the above rather than strictly identical to it. This definition also rules out humans, who by birth irregularity, are unable to produce oxytocin. Likewise, depending on how you fill out the neurobiological extras, this account may or may not exclude all non-humans.

Def 2. Love is consistently acting to meet the needs of another being for no other reason than to secure that being’s happiness.

Results: this definition my be even more narrow than the former, as it would, by definition preclude anything unable to act (however you flesh out that term). So, people who are unconscious can’t love. Similarly, I think this definition would probably exclude most animals.

Def 3: ...well, you’ve all argued so vociferously about this, someone must have a working definition...

 

[JoXie411]

I spent 3 hours trying to paint my dang fingernails too.... only to have to remove it all. As soon as I took it off he was totally fine. And it was like a pale pink color nothing striking

He thought your fingers were a giant spider trying to eat him

 

[AnamCara]

I spent 3 hours trying to paint my dang fingernails too.... only to have to remove it all. As soon as I took it off he was totally fine. And it was like a pale pink color nothing striking

I have pretty long nail extensions with different colors every week -- mona doesn't seem to notice. Now -- when I came home with a new, large-ish tattoo around the wrist of my feeding hand (a moth no less!) she was none too happy.

 

[Kaizen]

Anybody going to offer a definition, or some defining criteria for love, emotion, trust, etc? If not, I don’t blame you. But I’m not sure this debate will go anywhere unless all parties are working with a similar definition.

 

[Beman]

I have pretty long nail extensions with different colors every week -- mona doesn't seem to notice. Now -- when I came home with a new, large-ish tattoo around the wrist of my feeding hand (a moth no less!) she was none too happy.

Yeah well apparently I will not have acrylic nails in my future much less a little polish. He went full crazy on me bobbing and weaving like he was Mike Tyson. It was pretty crazy.