I converted this to a post for two reasons. 1) b.. ‘s synthesis represents an achievement of replicability. The good news is that one can learn to understand the internal processes of the animal mind, we do all have one after all. However the bad news is you might end up thinking like me. 2) I’ve been unable to edit in comments section so hopefully this will straighten out in a post.
So, can it be said that…
– Prey Drive accounts for the attraction. >Is the basis for the entire interaction.
KB: Yes, but to break it down; the basic state of attraction is the result of a whole body state of tension induced by hunger versus balance mandates. Hunger craves input/change, balance craves stasis and prefers “defined” inputs.
Hunger —> <—Balance = Tension.
Release from Tension when the two mandates are satisfied equals Emotion. That which resolves Tension (so that the CNS allows an action predicated by hunger) is embodied by a Preyful Aspect.
Emotion —-> Preyful Aspect (+)
So emotion is always a positive state of attraction. Then when an expression of emotion meets with Resistance as it always does, stress is produced and stored as a physical memory of the experience.
Emotion ——-> Resistance ———> (+) = Stress
When stress is subsequently triggered by an Object-of-Resistance, and if the emotional capacity is high enough, then it will add to the emotional current to produce Drive. Drive is aroused by the Source of Resistance, or Negative Polarity (-) while still remaining cognizant of the preyful aspect (+) and additionally a Midpoint (*).
Stress + Emotion = Drive —–> (-) ——- (+)——–(*)
– High Emotional Capacity provides strength of Hunger (over Balance), which accounts for maintained state of Drive vs. reversion to Instinct.
KB: Yes, however, first hunger is stronger than balance (HUNGER/balance) and this then renders a high emotional capacity. Thus the infants of all species (infancy being the phase of life where hunger is prototypically stronger than balance) have higher emotional capacity and a stronger social disposition then the elders of their species. Whereas when balance is stronger than hunger (BALANCE/hunger) than instincts take over. A high capacity dog will weight the preyful aspect over the predatory aspect in an Object-of-Resistance so that it is aroused rather than inhibited by the resistance it encounters. Below is a process of elaboration between dogs (A) and (B) wherein emotion is reflected and absorbed back and forth in a state of high emotional capacity.
1 (A) Projector ——-> (B) Projectee
2 (A) Projectee <——- (B) Projector
3 (A) Projector ——-> (B) Projectee
4 (A) Projectee <——- (B) Projector
The higher the emotional capacity (HUNGER/balance) then the longer the process of elaboration can go on until it reaches a point of intensity that induces both individuals to align and synchronize their movements around a common and greater Object-of-Resistance in order to accelerate it by absorbing their stress loads.
(A)——-> O-R ——->
>Evidenced by arousal response (mouth on midpoint) vs. alarm/overload/stiffness response (fight/flight/paralysis). Stress triggered by deer is channeled into flow vs. collapse. Also, continued pressure elaborates into stronger engagement with midpoint (dog accelerates object-in-common, i.e., bite + carry).
KB: Yes, exactly right.
b… – Low Prey Threshold explains why dog is deflected onto midpoint vs. direct connection with object of attraction/resistance. The deer exceeds the dog’s prey threshold because it doesn’t fit in its mouth, like a bird would.
KB: Yes, exactly right.
– Breeding (selection for amplified neonate state) accounts for the soft mouth vs. firm grip (as with a GSD doing police work) or crushing bite (as with a ratter dispatching vermin).
KB: Actually, the firm, hard but not maximum crushing bite as in the calm carry, is the same as the soft mouth for the bird dog (or I should say, the equal/opposite). The killing bite of the terrier with all the thrashing is balance suddenly becoming stronger than hunger (BALANCE/hunger) at a peak state of intensity. In other words the process of elaboration collapses into the kill as things are no longer going fast enough once prey is in the mouth. The shaking of course would kill the prey as well as begin its dismemberment. But the dog is led to this because of the momentum not yet brought to terminus and still energizing the dog. The shaking dissipates the running the dog would otherwise be doing were it chasing the prey. (In contrast note the cat bringing the prey, paralyzed with the strength of the grip, yet still alive—-back to the den. This enables a further process of elaboration that brings the young into the formula. The prey is the midpoint that connects the adult to the predatory aspects of its offspring.)
So… Prey Drive provides the attraction.
KB: Technically emotion provides the attraction to the body, stress the attraction to the predatory aspect. High emotional capacity enables Drive which then marshals Stress to provide Force so as to overcome Resistance. So it’s correct to call it Prey Drive, but we can break it down into these constituents.
Low Prey Threshold causes the attraction to be deflected from object of resistance (deer) onto midpoint (rock) to express “fight drive”. High Emotional Capacity allows the dog to channel continued pressure (stress triggered by object of resistance) into continued work (“fight drive”) and subsequently to give credit for flow to the negatives (deer, human).
KB: Yes, exactly right. Because the Golden does have strong Fight Drive in the technical sense of the term, and because hunger is stronger than balance but its nerves are attuned to the vibration of the small prey so that when it is aroused, it is easily deflected. Thus the human is in position to turn this Drive into all manner of complex work so that the dog can overcome a level of complexity/resistance that would be the equivalent to any working police dog, it would just play out over the long term in not quite such an intense expression.
I was also trying to put my finger on what provides the fuel for work/overcoming resistance. That is, what trait accounts for the ability to work harder or longer – what might be seen as a variable level of drive (as in what’s referred to by “high-drive” or “fight drive”). But I think I see here that the “fuel” is the dog’s stress reserves triggered by resistance, and the extent to which the dog can continue to channel that stress into work is a function of its emotional capacity, i.e. its capacity to stay in drive under continuous or increasing pressure without emotional collapse. Does that sound right?
KB: Yes, the fuel is hunger/arousal to Resistance so that Stress is processed through a sensual body, rather than a sensitized one. In regard to traits, this illustrates the systems logic underneath behavior because a trait is the capacity to switch to the complementary phase of a wave, in other words, Dog B collects when Dog A projects, and then vice versa. Flipping from one trait to another is the same by way of Pavlovian imprinting as running at full speed, hence, intrinsically satisfying. The ability to make a trait-on-demand results from high emotional capacity due to hunger over balance and now the dog can execute its Drive-to-Make-Contact at whatever frequency of vibration (prey threshold) it has been selectively bred to have in the hunt. These are the options when Resistance hits a high intensity, collapse and then fight/flight, or arouse and then fight to penetrate to essence (direct/active typical of terrier orientation) or deflect for indirect/reactive approach (herding, gun dog)