|
I agree with the above - and I also wonder if domesticated animals can be fairly compared to humans stuck in a system.
I don't think animals in a zoo sit there pining for the great outdoors and that fresh, wild-caught, hormone-free antelope they could expend hours and thousands of calories running down. But then, those don't necessarily count as domesticated - if you want domesticated animals, think livestock or pets. This process alters them - generation by generation - to the point where the puppy in the parlor is not the same as a wolf cub in the parlor (wolves and domestic dogs belong to the same species, by the way, if we're talking in Linnean terms). Since domestication involves artificial selection of the most docile, "attractive" and useful specimens, eventually we wind up with a variety of creature that we've created - a creature whose environment is that which humans raise it in. People will tell you that certain animals, no matter how well trained or accustomed to humans, remain unpredictable and wild - this is what separates a jackal or coyote from a Labrador. You can't tame a killer whale any more than you can "tame" a grizzly. You can become part of its frame of reference in such a way that it isn't prone to be hostile or fearful, but that's it. It can change its mind with the right stimuli.
Domestication is just guided adaptation - and humans have the curious trait of being able to direct the adaptation of themselves and one another consciously. Sure, I think a lot of the crap society makes you do is a waste of time - and there's an understandable note of frustration in your post that I would sympathize with. But there is no sinister subversion of humanity's "natural" state going on here, as I see it.
|