What’s the tipping point for an idea like vegan living to become mainstream? Does it come down to sheer numbers or systematic changes?

The principle of intersubjective agreement suggests that where multiple subjects and disciplines find overlapping consensus, a level of objectivity can be verified. If it’s about institutional systems, there seems to be a direction: thousands of studies of the animal mind suggest animal sentience is a reality, the health benefits of plant based eating are increasingly recognized in medical research, the environmental costs of agribusiness are clear, increasingly scientific research is investing in new models to reduce animal experimentation, and religious and moral theorists are paying increased attention to the kind of ethical gymnastics involved in eating and using animals for human ends.

That’s an awful lot of agreement across multiple institutions and systems about animals. But the scales have yet to turn ideas into understanding, from belief into action.  Every day brings a choice to recognize that more and more signs point toward compassionate living.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. ~ Arthur Schopenhauer

• Blinded by Science: funded research on dogs continues – despite critiques and questions about both its scientific validity and moral justifiability. Research and animal testing continues in all sectors, from health and medicine to household and cosmetic products.
• Animal cruelty, strongly correlated with other crimes of violence, is widely under-reported.
• Dogs for Sale: About half of all adoptable dogs who end up in animal shelters are killed because no one adopts them while “designer dogs” are bred and sold for specific aesthetics and breed traits, whether for purebred or hybrid mixes.

What you can do:

• Choose to adopt when it’s time to add a companion animal to your family
• Choose cruelty-free products that are not tested on animals
• Speak out  and organize to stop puppy mills
• Get involved in  legal advocacy for animals to help stop animal cruelty
• Don’t forget: millions of other animals – like  farm animals – also suffer every day.  Meal choices matter.

The greatest danger to our future is apathy ” ~ Jane Goodall

•  If you want to allow your dog to swim, find a place where dogs are welcome. Dog Beach anyone? 
• If the water looks dirty, still, or full of algae, skip it. Blue Green Algae, in particular, is toxic and can cause moderate to severe health complications.  For signs and symptoms of poisoning, check out the pet poison helpline.
• Pay attention to your canine friend and stay close- a dog can slip into the water by accident or be pulled under by tides and waves. Consider trying a comfy fitting k9 life jacket equipped with a safety grip; these make an emergency lift simpler and are brightly colored, making it easier to keep an eye on your pooch.
• Not all dogs know how to swim!
  • Never force a dog to enter the water. Seriously. Never.
  • Make sure they can enter/exit water easily (no steep jumps, barriers, etc.)
• Bring Water: offering fresh water to drink is better than risking stomach problems. The Water Boy and H204K9 are Tooth’s top hydration choices.
• Enjoy! Summer fun is a great way to bond with your canine friends.

Despite decades of research demonstrate animal cognition at various levels across diverse species: from task oriented pigs to tool making crows making.  On both sides of the debate, it turns out that often, when a level thought is proven, the criteria are changed, methods are questioned, or a study is dismissed.  Thinking beasts may be out there, but that doesn’t mean they’re met with welcome curiosity, so the debate continues. Associated with language (not just communication) and belief, a capacity for thinking about thinking is also often associated with cognition, which indicates a high level of abstraction and complex thought. Perhaps the best arguments manage to prove one thing: thinking is an ambiguous skill to measure.  

Yet moral consideration is not dependent on exhibitions of complex thought for humans, which suggests the importance of such hardline distinctions are blurry at best.  In a way, the increasingly common recognition of animals’ various abilities, emotions, and sentience, one wonders, does it matter if they think precisely the way people do?  At what level of abstraction does harm become acceptable when it comes to animal welfare, agricultural or scientific research practices, or food choices? Utlimately if humans are rational, when does knowledge begin to influence decisions toward change?

If a pig can learn to play video games, is it more than a neat trick?  If playfulness seems associated with a capacity social bonds, then this reflects some level of social awareness.  Playfulness also often evidences aspects of communication, whether through sound, physical movements (think tail wags), or other indicators. Moreover, play suggests a capacity for independence and creativity. Yet many researchers are careful to guard against anthropomorphic pronouncements and label animal play as instinctive.

What’s the big deal about something that is engaged in primarily “for the fun of it”?  If taken as accurate, playfulness suggests animal sentience. Such indicators would confirm that degrees of personhood may be applicable to nonhuman animals. The assertion may bring with it profound implications, legally and morally, as evident in Farm Sanctuary’s Someone Project.  From bioethics to animal rights, debates continue about what traits indicate sentience and what constitutes personhood. 

“Play, laughter, and friendship burst across the species barrier” ~Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson, When Elephants Weep

For humans, play behaviors have long been been associated with learning and are valued for social, moral, intellectual benefits across all stages of development. Yet researchers often debate the purpose of play behaviors when exhibited by animals, careful to resist comparisons between humans and nonhumans.  In fact, many intellectual projects seem to aim deliberately at establishing criteria for “personhood” that exclude non-human animals. For a provocative interdisciplinary analysis of human-animal relationships and the theoretical divide, see Beyond Boundaries (Barbara Noske, 1997, Black Rose Books). The implications of “play time” may well challenge the status quo by raising questions about the choices we make every day, from what we eat to what we wear.