0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I think it was just and attempt at humor. The fact that you went through the trouble of keeping the tick to begin with demonstrates that you do not suffer from mental illness (of that kind )To be clear, animal cruelty for the sake of cruelty is pathological. I see a problem, however, with the suggested "conclusions" of that article - and there are many written that point out the same "fact". The problem is that they are only looking at one quadrant of the 2 X 2 contingency table and as a useful predictor, it is ill-advised, but we seem to gravitate toward these in the media all the time. What is the proportion of serial killers that did not display animal cruelty? What is the proportion of non-serial killers who displayed animal cruelty? - see what I am getting at?
Quote from: DrG on May 23, 2021, 03:49:53 pmI think it was just and attempt at humor. The fact that you went through the trouble of keeping the tick to begin with demonstrates that you do not suffer from mental illness (of that kind )To be clear, animal cruelty for the sake of cruelty is pathological. I see a problem, however, with the suggested "conclusions" of that article - and there are many written that point out the same "fact". The problem is that they are only looking at one quadrant of the 2 X 2 contingency table and as a useful predictor, it is ill-advised, but we seem to gravitate toward these in the media all the time. What is the proportion of serial killers that did not display animal cruelty? What is the proportion of non-serial killers who displayed animal cruelty? - see what I am getting at?According to the shows on TV, we have new serial killers popping up every week. In real life, we don't see too many of them. Drawing a conclusion with any sort of confidence may be difficult. Studies of child and spouse abuse may provide a much larger sample size.
... but have you never noticed how a wide range of animals gnaw at things too hard to have any obvious nutritional qualities? It seems to be baked deep into animal behaviour. Sometimes it extracts minerals. Sometimes it accesses bone marrow locked inside. Sometimes it has no clear goal. Whatever the benefits, its commonplace.
Quote from: coppice on May 23, 2021, 02:11:27 pm... but have you never noticed how a wide range of animals gnaw at things too hard to have any obvious nutritional qualities? It seems to be baked deep into animal behaviour. Sometimes it extracts minerals. Sometimes it accesses bone marrow locked inside. Sometimes it has no clear goal. Whatever the benefits, its commonplace.Some animals (rodents, in particular) constantly gnaw to keep their teeth worn down, as their teeth are always growing. Hence the saying about "being a bit long in the tooth." They also gnaw to keep their teeth sharp.
Quote from: jbeng on May 23, 2021, 06:59:47 pmQuote from: coppice on May 23, 2021, 02:11:27 pm... but have you never noticed how a wide range of animals gnaw at things too hard to have any obvious nutritional qualities? It seems to be baked deep into animal behaviour. Sometimes it extracts minerals. Sometimes it accesses bone marrow locked inside. Sometimes it has no clear goal. Whatever the benefits, its commonplace.Some animals (rodents, in particular) constantly gnaw to keep their teeth worn down, as their teeth are always growing. Hence the saying about "being a bit long in the tooth." They also gnaw to keep their teeth sharp.There's a chicken and egg question there. Do they gnaw to keep their teeth in check, or did the teeth evolve to deal with endless gnawing?
Quote from: coppice on May 23, 2021, 07:01:55 pmQuote from: jbeng on May 23, 2021, 06:59:47 pmQuote from: coppice on May 23, 2021, 02:11:27 pm... but have you never noticed how a wide range of animals gnaw at things too hard to have any obvious nutritional qualities? It seems to be baked deep into animal behaviour. Sometimes it extracts minerals. Sometimes it accesses bone marrow locked inside. Sometimes it has no clear goal. Whatever the benefits, its commonplace.Some animals (rodents, in particular) constantly gnaw to keep their teeth worn down, as their teeth are always growing. Hence the saying about "being a bit long in the tooth." They also gnaw to keep their teeth sharp.There's a chicken and egg question there. Do they gnaw to keep their teeth in check, or did the teeth evolve to deal with endless gnawing?They gnaw to sharpen their teeth (the front layer is hard apatite enamel, the back layer the softer dentin, so the back wears faster, producing a sharp edge), and the constant growing would be to ensure there’s still tooth to sharpen! :p