Friendly Greetings Elicit Improved Effectiveness of Dog Behaviour ()
1. Introduction
1.1. Social Development Is Important to a Child’s Education
Lev Vygotsky, an early 20th-century Russian psychologist, theorised that early childhood development is a function of culture [1], that a child’s ability to learn (and intellectualise) benefits from social interactions. In support of Vygotsky’s social development theory.1
1) It has relevance to early childhood education today [2], even in US, as inferred from the overview of the theories, practices, and policies used in early childhood education in “The Wiley Handbook of Early Childhood Care and Education” [3].
2) Nations with the highest student scores on the Programme for International Student Assessment aptitude test (the PISA)2 historically have had cultural freedom from having a high level of social consciousness (and for many, from a high level of political social consciousness). For Asian nations, Taoist philosophy provides a high level of social consciousness (see the next section). US has a low level of social consciousness, Taoist philosophy is minimally influential, teachers do not have high social status, and US ranks low on PISA aptitude scores. Seeing as though nations with the highest PISA scores historically have a high level of social consciousness, inclusive Finland, while Finland does not have memorisation and exam-oriented learning (high school students in Finland have only one exam at the end of their senior year of high school [4]), suggests that cultural-intellectual freedom from a high level of social consciousness was most important for improved student learning, and intellectualising, resulting in higher PISA scores (as explained,3 and in Subsection 1.1.1, #5 (concerning the effectiveness of the social-friendly teaching method)).3,4
Taoism Confers a High Level of Social Consciousness Though It Is not Fully Understood
From logical deductions from a literal translation of the first four chapters of the book “Tao Te Ching” [8] (written 2600 years ago) the following meaning of Taoism is inferred (from deductive reasoning in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution): The revelation that “humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive” is of value to society and the individual. For a review of the proof of the theorem that humans are admittedly as such, in part from my two new theories of evolution, see Subsection 1.1.1.5,6 This theorem is of much importance to society for example from the evidence for the greater effectiveness of gquic psychology and the social-friendly teaching method. Initially, Taoism did not entail superstition nor religion. I believe Lao Tzu, the presumed author deduced humans to have a peaceful composure from his observations of what made people compassionate, aggressive, and competitive (at a time when capitalism did not exist). Capitalism, from being an exploitive system of government, causes people to not be compassionate, and to tend to be competitive, and aggressive (to succeed in society). I believe the Tao Te Ching was written in riddle-like verse to protect Lao Tzu, his colleagues, and students from the wrath of the monarchy and plutocracy which (as inferred) did not value compassion from their exploitation of peasant labour (for profit). A passage from this book states that “the soft and supple will prevail”, which as inferred is a reference to the idealization of gquic psychology values (described in Subsections 1.1.1 and 1.2.2) which exists today in people and nations with a high level of social consciousness, but is not the idealization of submissiveness.
3) Supporting evidence for Vygotsky’s “social development theory” also comes from the proof for the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive, and non-aggressive, see Subsection 1.1.1.
The Theorem That Humans Are Loving, Non-Competitive, and Non-Aggressive
The more effective “Social-Friendly, Teaching-Learning Theory” and a more effective psychology termed “Gquic Psychology” are based on the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive, and non-aggressive, previewed in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution. In brief, this theorem’s evidence, comes from: 1) The theory of (cultural and) evolutionary freedom which shows that evolution is a function of culture and evolutionary freedom, not selection, i.e., selection is not needed for evolution to proceed. 2) The freedom to intellectualize theory which shows that higher cognitive ability evolves as a function of evolutionary freedom and species culture, not selection, see Subsection 3.6, the section entitled “the freedom to intellectualize theory”. In accordance with this theory “an ability to reason” initially does not evolve as a function of selection nor social competition, see Subsections 3.7 - 3.8, but instead as a function of sexual preferences, reduced conflict between conspecifics, a friendship favourable group composition, and evolutionary freedom in other ways, e.g., from reduced predatory impact, a high energy food source, and in social species, from more frequent Mebir behavioural responses, from their having more frequent social interactions. Evidence in part comes from the study of comparative behavioral ecology between highly intelligent animal species. Highly intelligent species which have not evolved an ability to reason (as inferred from their artwork, including both species of chimpanzee, the gorilla, and elephant) have restricted evolutionary freedom to evolve an ability to reason, (see Subsections 3.7, the section titled “how an ability to reason evolved in humans following the freedom to intellectualize theory”), though an ability to reason would eventually improve fitness. The evidence for humans having a peaceful composure comes from 3) Hunter and gatherer societies with the greatest cultural freedom being more egalitarian. 4) There is convincing evidence that the common bottlenose dolphin has a peaceful composure between conspecifics7, and that they have an ability to reason, as per the freedom to intellectualize theory (for a review of the evidence for this theory, see Subsection 3.7, the section titled “how an ability to reason evolved in humans per the freedom to intellectualize theory”) from 1) Their unique, exceptional evolutionary freedom (amongst vertebrates, mammals, cetaceans and, odontocetes). They even have greater (cultural and) evolutionary freedom than our ancient hominid ancestors and primates (in part, from their having reductions in intrusions of personal space when feeding, the Atlantic coastal population having an apex friendship-favourable group composition and low predatory impact as a species), as reviewed in the video I have made [9] [10]. 2) Following the freedom to intellectualise theory, they have a peaceful composure between conspecifics. 3) The female engages in (pronounced) sexual preferences. 4) The kind of interspecies close friends the common bottlenose dolphin has (with three other cetaceans) is in harmony with their species’ personality of being convivial (between conspecifics), creative, and is consistent with their long-term associations (between males). 5) Their song is seemingly improvised and used in social creativity, I suspect it is the most complex interactive song of animal species8 (for convincing evidence for their complex and interactive song see the video I made [9] [10]). Preliminary results of Ly Fredrick (his pen name) suggest that the Atlantic common bottlenose dolphin sings in major keys, however, more research is needed to confirm this.
As inferred, the common bottlenose dolphin’s documented (primarily male) displaced aggressiveness against other species of smaller odontocete is a function of their imperfect society, i.e., females and males not pairing up in long term associations and exceptionally close, (loving) bonds which are formed from their 1) (likely) Having anability to love. 2) Interactive creativity in song (an effective means to alleviate boredom and to provide a heightened since of identity (for both the singer and listener dolphin)). 3) A song revealing a singer’s capacity to love.
With conclusive evidence for their having an ability to reason, there is convincing evidence that their “ability to reason” would not be crucial to their survival, as presented in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution, which provides supporting evidence they evolved their “ability to reason” following the freedom to intellectualize theory (the mechanisms of this theory are described in Subsection 3.7, and evidence that common bottlenose dolphin evolved an ability to reason per this theory see 1.1.1, #4).
Supporting evidence for Vygotsky’s “social development theory” also comes from:
4) The convincing evidence for the social-friendly teaching method being more effective, in part from nations with a high level of social consciousness having higher PISA scores, see Subsection 1.1, # (2) and in part from the evidence for the Mebir in humans, see Section 2, (including from the evidence for the Mebir in dogs, inclusive of the stimulation of creative, assertive, explorative, and play behaviour. The kinds of Mebir behavioural responses of dogs are listed in the ethogram of Subsection 3.3 and are summarised in Table 1 and Table 2. There is convincing evidence from past research, that when humans are social with dogs, dogs have the Mebir of becoming better at problem-solving [11]).
5) The proof that gquic psychology is more effective and speedier than Darwinian psychology, see Subsection 1.2.2, and as inferred, is safer, and tends to be less disruptive, and more desirable (if allowed).
A Second Possible Explanation for High PISA Aptitude Scores in Nations with a High Level of Social Consciousness
There is possibly another reason for nations with a high level of social consciousness having the highest PISA aptitude scores other than from improved learning as a Mebir, (which occurs in dogs [11]). Students (in a nation with a high level of social consciousness) are possibly having an association of the joy of the Mebir 1) from having a high level of social consciousness and/or 2) from the social-friendly teaching method9, to the joy of intellectualising to help others (these are enjoyable social experiences). The evidence that this student cognitive association likely occurs in nations with a high level of social consciousness comes from the evidence that the act of giving (in kindness) elicits the Mebir in the giver, (not only in the receiver),9 that sociability and the Mebir are enjoyable, see Section 3, the section titled the evidence for the Mebir being associated with a feeling of well-being, and three convincing lines of evidence that animals can make a non-conscious association of two enjoyable behaviours so that two otherwise unrelated behaviours can co-occur, including: 1) The displaced innate responses of dogs to a friendly greeting, see Subsection 3.2, the Section titled “three kinds of dog Mebirs of a displaced innate response”. 2) The complex mating ritual of the great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus), see Section 3, the Section titled “two kinds of joyful associations likely occurred in the evolution of elaborateness of the great crested grebe”. 3. Nuptial gift-giving behaviour of various animal species.10
1.2. The Social-Friendly Learning-Instructional Theory and Methods
The social-friendly learning-instructional theory was formulated from the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive, and non-aggressive (the conclusive evidence for this theorem is presented in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution, for a review of the evidence see Subsection 1.1.1), and from my experiences of being a teacher at universities and colleges in China PR. To make class enjoyable and to better facilitate learning and stimulate higher-order thinking, social-friendly teaching methods include 1) Nurturing a high level of social consciousness in students and the teacher. 2) Introducing topics of human interest, for examples see Subsection 1.2.1, the Section titled “topics of human interest in the natural science”. 3) Introducing creative works of human interest that relate to a topic. 4) Individualised attention11. 5) Collaborative. 6) Cooperative activities. 7) Social creativity. 8) The act of giving.
1.2.1. The Social-Friendly Teaching Method Is Preferable (for Seven Reasons)
1) There is conclusive evidence for the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive, and non-aggressive (see 1.1.1). The social-friendly, teaching-instructional theory is the only teaching theory based entirely on this theorem (yet Vygotsky’s social development theory is in line with it). There is convincing evidence that the social-friendly teaching method is more effective than traditional teaching methods, see 2, 3 and 5 (in part from the evidence for the Mebir, see Section 2). Yet, Vygotsky did not realize, from him not knowing that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive that besides social experiences, the following are also important to education (in part, from enhancing the effect of the Mebir): a) Communist and socialist values; b) Gquic psychology, which is shown to be a more effective psychology (described in Subsections 1.2.1 - 1.2.2), c) Topics; d) Works of art of human interest (see below); e) That less adept students receive individualized attention;12 f) Social creativity (more likely manifested in communist and socialist nations); g) Time permitting, that students engage in the act of giving, socially as part of a class,12 including, in taking part in pure or applied research and/or in doing a literature search on a topic of human interest, designing software for cultural development, being creative (in the (non-commercial) arts) with use of social-friendly teaching method and topics of human interest (in works of art, in making inventions (in harmony with human nature), and in teaching (with the social-friendly teaching method)), and engaging in cooperative, collaborative endeavours (e.g., in studying together, and in using software to best facilitate consensus decision making processes). Giving socially as an act of kindness, in class, when “the gift” is well received, is not only enjoyable to the receiver, it is also enjoyable for the giver (in nations with a high level of social consciousness) for the reasons listed,9 and from the act of giving providing a student with a sense of identity.
The Act of Giving Is of Benefit to Society (With Safeguards against
Corruption)
That the act of giving is of benefit to society is inferred from: 1) The evidence for the existence of the Mebir innate response in humans, see Section 2. 2) The evidence for the Mebir providing evolutionary freedom, see Subsection 3.6. 3) The theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive (see Subsection 1.1.1). 4) The evidence that gquic psychology (based on this theorem) is more effective, see Subsection 1.2.2, and that it is crucial for solving certain societal problems, see 4, the Section titled: solving societal problems with gquic psychology. In a word, gquic psychology is “teaching without use of social conditioning” and dominance, (i.e., it is a form of giving)). For an introduction to gquic psychology see 1.1.1. The evidence for gquic psychology being critical for solving certain societal problems includes: 1) Evidence for it being speedier.13 2) It being more effective psychology, see Subsection 1.2.2, (in part, evidence for gquic psychology being more effective comes from the evidence for the Mebir in humans, see Section 2, and the evidence for the above-mentioned theorem (for the peaceful composure of human) (see Subsection 1.1.1)). 3) As inferred, gquic psychology is safer and tends to be less disruptive. 4) There is convincing evidence that the act of giving (in kindness) elicits the Mebir in the giver (not only in the receiver).9
Additional reasons the social-friendly learning-instructional theory is preferable:
2) Student individualized attention (for each student to obtain their fullest potential) is not in conflict with societal progress, as inferred from the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, see Subsection 1.1.1. Student grades can be based on student ability and the degree of student effort rather than on repeatedly testing a student’s ability to memorize. Individualized attention11 has the added benefit of releasing the Mebir, from being an intimate social experience, which as inferred improves the effectiveness of learning, and what is more, improves the likelihood of societal progress.
3) That nations with the highest PISA aptitude scores historically have had a high level of social consciousness (see Subsection 1.1, #(2)), and that Finland has a high level of social consciousness and high PISA scores but does not have memorisation and exam-oriented learning (has only one exam at the end of a student’s senior year of high school [4]) suggest that a high level of social consciousness, i.e., the social-friendly teaching method was the determining factor that brought about high PISA scores.
As inferred, the mechanisms that brought about higher PISA scores in nations with historically a high level of social consciousness are:
a) Social-friendly experiences which release the Mebir (for the evidence that humans undergo the Mebir see Section 2, and Subsection 1.1, #2). Specifically, from: i) The teacher, family and acquaintances communicating to students the worth and beauty of a high level of social consciousness, if only in body language, intonation of speech and in their personality14 which releases the Mebir innate response of improved effectiveness of behaviour. ii) From the introduction of these teaching methodologies as part of the curriculum: the use of topics of human interest see Subsection 1.2.1, the section titled “topics of human interest in the natural sciences”, creative works of human interest, and social activities (which release the Mebir).
That a high level of social consciousness and social-friendly teaching methodologies release the Mebir innate response in students, which improves student learning is inferred from the evidence for the Mebir in humans, see Section 2, and the evidence for the Mebir innate response of dogs, including heightened learning [11] and the stimulation of dog creative, social and explorative behaviour, while at the same time there is evidence for the Mebir being commonly extreme in dogs, see Table 2.
As stated previously, another possible mechanism that brought about higher PISA scores in nations with historically a high level of social consciousness includes:
b) That students are making an association of the joy of being social, and of the Mebir, from a social experience (i.e., from a high level of social consciousness and the social-friendly teaching method) with the joy of engaging in higher-order thinking to help others (see Subsection 1.1.1, the section titled “a second possible explanation for high PISA aptitude scores…”)
The social-friendly teaching method is also preferable because:
4) The curriculum of the teacher brings students to realize the importance of society having a high level of social consciousness and the importance of gquic psychology for solving those societal problems which require the masses to gain objective knowledge to be solved. For how gquic psychology is preferable for managing certain societal problems and crucial for solving certain societal problems, see the Section below titled “solving societal problems with gquic psychology”, below. The use of gquic psychology for solving certain societal problems, as inferred, will not cause Darwinian psychology to fail because gquic psychology and Darwinian psychology are not mutually exclusive in the same society,15 for which there is evidence, from communist and socialist nations using both kinds of psychology (personal observation).
Gquic Psychology is Critical for Solving Certain Societal Problems
From gquic psychology being more effective, speedier, safer and less disruptive, see Subsection 1.2.2, it is best suited (and thus crucial) for solving societal problems dependent upon the masses gaining objective knowledge to be solved. For example, it is critical for 1) Raising social consciousness in capitalist nations in this era of the global economy and the possible mind-reading of the secret police, a) With an event that shows that the poor are good workers, and b) A comprehensive social welfare system with safeguards against corruption, including socialized medicine. Gquic psychology is also critical for 2) Effectively reducing racism and discrimination with a program that has those which are guilty of discrimination (A) work with the best of the those they discriminated against (B), to learn that (B) are amazing, capable people. 3) For establishing unions that employ use of gquic psychology to improve worker conditions, and to protect unions from corruption, and the members of a union from strike breakers when on strike. Gquic psychology is also critical for 4) Sustainable world peace and 5) For solving global human health and safety problems with a new United Nations solely based on gquic psychology, devoid of the influence of invested interests. The way a new UN needs to be organized is described in a video I made [9] [10].
Additional reasons the social-friendly learning-instructional theory is preferable:
5) There is evidence that the social-friendly teaching method is preferable from the phenomenal results I had with its’ use as a teacher at colleges and universities in China PR. The greater effectiveness of the social-friendly teaching method was apparent in five spoken English classes I taught in which I used a Text book I wrote containing photographs of human interest16, which held student interest and was in part from the positive student comments about the textbook. In contrast, the three (foreign, modern) texts I was assigned did not hold student interest (for more than two consecutive classes).
6) The social-friendly teaching method is preferable because “topics of human interest” likely improves long-term memory of knowledge learned (in contrast with rote memorisation), from the learner liking to think about topics of human interest outside of their involvement with studying.17
7) The social-friendly teaching method is also preferable because it brings students to learn that the following are important to society, a high level of social consciousness (for the reasons listed14), the social-friendly teaching method and gquic psychology, from being more effective. Gquic psychology is of importance from being more effective, speedier13 and enjoyable than Darwinian psychology, safer and less disruptive, see Subsection 1.2.2.
Topics of Human Interest in the Natural Sciences
Conclusive evidence is presented for the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive, and non-aggressive in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution (for a review of the evidence, see 1.1.1). Topics of human interest include topics which teach that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive (and all that is inferred from this premise). I hypothesize they are of interest to the people of capitalist nations when supplemented with a relevant creative work of human interest. The photographs in this article of Figures 1-9 are of human interest from depicting the dog Mebir and two social-friendly behaviours of wolves. In the natural sciences, topics of human interest include: 1) The beneficial effect of the Mebir (of an improvement in the effectiveness of behaviour) on society and that it provides species with cultural and evolutionary freedom, (see Subsection 3.6). 2) How species evolve as a function of species culture and cultural and evolutionary freedom’ (not as a function of selection), 3) How a species’ ecology brings it to have restricted or exceptional cultural and evolutionary freedom. 4) Applied and pure research that is in harmony with human nature. 5) Learning how a species’ personality is a function of exceptional or restricted cultural freedom (from studies of its’ ecology and ethology). Chinese and Russian TV programs and films often include engaging (non-aggressive) animal culture and social behaviour in their entertainment (personal observation), which makes their TV programs and films especially interesting. 6) The topic of the benefits of using gquic psychology, shown to be more effective, speedier, safer, less disruptive and crucial for world peace and solving societal problems which are dependent upon the masses gaining objective knowledge to be solved. 7) The topic of the benefits of communist and socialist values and a comprehensive social welfare system (with safeguards against corruption). 8) How government programs, computer software, industry, inventions, machines, and science (in harmony with human nature) help the masses.18 9) The topic of how to end self-initiated unkindness (including racism and sexism) with gquic psychology.
1.2.2. Gquic Psychology Is More Effective, Speedier, Safer and Less Disruptive
The evidence that gquic psychology is more effective than Darwinian psychology includes: 1) evidence (from group psychology) that acts of kindness (if allowed) are more influential than acts of aggression, i.e., from convincing evidence that variable volume is more influential than a disturbing, loud sound, personal observation, from many trials (more research is needed) and from the higher PISA student aptitude scores in nations with a high level of social consciousness, see Section 1.1, #(2). 2) Conclusive evidence for humans being loving, non-competitive, and non-aggressive (see Subsection 1.1.1). However, certain human cultures as I hypothesize are more aggressive culturally, from: a) either having evolved to be as such, from having an “unfavourable ecology” (as there is evidence for, for certain species of pheasants, the hump-back whale, the hump-backed dolphin, the common chimpanzee, the long-finned pilot whale, and pinnipeds with harems), and/or b) from having learned to be as such from a charismatic appearance or behaviours, c) from having to contend with self-initiated unkindness including an exploitive government, d) due to an interpretation of Darwinism, that causes the idealization of aggression. Additional evidence that gquic psychology is more effective includes: 3) Evidence for the Mebir response from a friendly greeting; see Section 2. 4) The evidence that Gquic psychology is more effective, as inferred, for solving societal problems which require that the general public becomes knowledgeable (devoid of any false advertising of invested interests) to be solved, see Subsection 1.2.1, the section titled “it is critical that gquic psychology is used to solve certain societal problems”. 5) Gquic psychology idealizes the use of science devoid of the influence of commercial advertising so that solutions to societal problems tend to be more appropriate. 6) The social-friendly teaching method is more effective than traditional teaching methods, see Subsections 1.2 and 1.2.1 (a method of gquic psychology). 7) For the evidence that gquic psychology is speedier.13
Works of Art of Human Interest Improves Student Learning and Can Greatly Help Solve Societal Problems (If Permitted)
When the scientific community recognises that gquic psychology is essential for solving societal problems described in Subsection 1.2.1, see the section titled “it is critical that gquic psychology is used to solve certain societal problems”, works of art and topics of human interest maybe popular in education, the media, literature, and the arts to better integrate gquic psychology into society. From my visits to the Museum of Contemporary art in Beijing, China PR (their website has examples of Chinese visual artwork) and to a contemporary art museum in Nanjing I believe that in China PR there is commonly works of visual art of human interest which portray the importance of society having a high level of social consciousness, and the concept that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive.
1.2.3. Applicability of the Social-Friendly Teaching Method
I hypothesize that people of nations with a high level of social consciousness find “topics of human interest’ to be of interest (especially the people of communist and socialist nations), personal observations from having been a teacher in China)”.19 I learned that my Chinese students in China PR were interested in topics of human interest as a teacher at colleges and universities (students in US do not seem to be interested in them, more research is needed). I hypothesize that in capitalist nations topics of human interest (if permitted) would be of interest, if accompanied by creative works of art of human interest.
1.3. The Discovery of the Mebir and Its Importance
I discovered that dogs manifest an improvement in effectiveness of behaviour from a friendly greeting (i.e., the Mebir) from being curious about what dog behavioural responses are like to a friendly greeting. Years later I realized I made an important discovery from the theorem I formulated, that human are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, see Subsection 1.1.1 derived from two new theories of evolution (I am publishing a book about), and my realization that I had not been introduced to this (intriguing) dog innate behaviour in my graduate ethology class. Consequently, I set about finding evidence for the dog Mebir and had many setbacks from lack of funding for the experimental approach, requiring two helpers and a dog. One assistant to walk a dog past me, and the other to record dog behaviour with a video camera (before, during and after my greeting a dog). I instead made an ethogram, which fortuitously yielded far more useful information about the nature of the dog Mebir. After realizing the importance of the discovery of the dog Mebir I began looking for evidence for the Mebir in humans and other animals which I found convincing evidence for, see Section 2. The discovery of the Mebiris of particular importance to the natural sciences, from 1) helping bring about the scientific community’s acceptance of two new theories of evolution I formulated and found conclusive evidence for, as the result of it being of importance to how social species evolve, i.e., it provides social species with cultural and evolutionary freedom to evolve more complex behaviours, see Subsection 3.6 and from 2) the Mebir’s importance to society, and political ideology (as inferred from the theorem that humans are loving non-competitive and non-aggressive, see Subsection 1.1.1), see Section 3, the section titled “the importance of the Mebir, social consciousness and four dog Mebirs to society” and Subsection 3.4. In general, the Mebir is important to society a) It in part explains why a high level of social consciousness is important to societal (including to cultural) development; b) Shows why, in part, the social-friendly teaching method (if allowed) is more effective (see Subsections 1.2. # (2), and 1.2.1); c) Why gquic psychology (introduced in Subsections 1.1.1) (if allowed), is more effective (see Subsection 1.2.2).
The discovery of the dog Mebir is in part in virtue of 1) My being a research scientist of ethology, ecology, and evolution such that I am keen on studying behaviour. 2) My living in a city where there are many dog owners. 3) My often cycling or walking when venturing from my place of residence, providing many opportunities to study dog behaviour. 4) My having played music to birds and having observed likely Mebir responses in their song, including, that my music incited birds to sing. 5) My playing improvised music to workers and having observed a likely Mebir response of their being more effective in working. 6) My having observed improvements in my improvisations from a friendly audience.
From having no other means to gather data I set about making an ethogram of dog responses to a friendly greeting. The following provides much credence to the evidence I provide for the existence of the Mebir (statistically). Convincing evidence that dogs are better at problem-solving when humans are social with them [11], that a dog owner’s gaze at their dog increases the durations of whining and whimpering and looking at the owner’s face [13],20 and decades of my interacting with dogs and songbirds at a distance and noting a Mebir response. My greetings to and my observations of the behaviours of animal social species suggest that the Mebir is widespread in fauna, including 1) The domesticated social fish, the Japanese Nishikigoi fish (i.e., I suspect in early morning, Cyprinus rubrofusus, an ornamental, east-Asian carp). 2) Horses (Equus ferus caballus). 3) Species of parrots, and free-ranging animals, including a) various species of songbird which respond to my bird calls (in their being incited to sing and to partially mimic my song). b) The solitary vireo songbird (Vireo solitarius) is known to exchange songs between males. It is perhaps more creative in song as a Mebir innate response to my improvised “bird song”. From creativity being rare in birds, their seemingly creative song as inferred, is in part a kind of songbird culture not crucial to survival. Their song is not only for designating territories and attracting a mate. 4) Possibly these species also exhibit a Mebir, the west coast spring field cricket (Gryllus veletisoides) a) the blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata); b) the common raven (Corvus corax); c) the crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos); d) the great white heron (Ardea alba); e) sea gulls (suborder Lari) (more data are needed); while f) humans likely become more effective in behaviour from being in a friendly milieu, inferred from the beneficial effect of a social-friendly audience on my ability to improvise more interesting music. When outside with a social-friendly audience I can improvise more interesting Chinese traditional music and the renaissance genre of classical music on the (alto, soprano, and sopranino) blockflöte but have difficulty improvising when there is a disturbance or without an audience in the darkness of night, (outdoors).21 My improvising to workers seems to bring them to work more in earnest and it is common knowledge that certain sports events in certain nations have cheer leaders.
The Mebir is Possibly an Oxytocin Hormonal Mediated Response
From a friendly greeting a dog can become more explorative, playful, creative, social, and can become more interactive (in a friendly way) with its’ owner, and with pedestrians and dogs (it has not met before). Improved assertiveness is a common dog Mebir. Occasionally a kind of “hunting instinct” is released as a displaced innate response (which, as inferred, improves fitness in wolves (Canus lupus)). A dog can become more aggressive (when being territorial), and past researchers have shown that human social interactions with dogs improve a dogs’ ability to learn [11]. The research on human-dog gazing interactions suggests that the hormone responsible for mediating the Mebir may be oxytocin [14], which is known to render a feeling of well-being in both dogs and humans.
People tend to relate to domestic dogs in petting them, feeding them and with verbal praise but not in greeting them from a distance, nor in playing music to them (despite that dogs like greetings from a distance and can be interested in human music, personal observation). In part, this is because 1) The evidence for the existence of heritable and learned animal culture (not crucial to survival), that is manifested in animals out of enjoyment has yet to gain acceptance amongst the scientific community. 2) Acts of kindness are discriminated against in capitalist nations (personal observation). 3) Humans are considered to be more intelligent than dogs, and because people who witness the Mebir (behavioural responses of dogs to a friendly greeting or gesture) (i.e., prior to this article’s publication) mistakenly attributed it as being only the result of social conditioning. From the concept of natural selection, people idealize social conditioning (as the way people ought to relate to animals) [15], consider an animal’s experiences of pleasure to be but only a mechanism to improve fitness [16] and feel that they should be dominant over dogs, which are less intelligent than humans (I have refuted from the concept of natural selection in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution). Insomuch the scientific community has yet to concur that animal culture (not crucial to survival) exists, people have no clue that dogs might enjoy a friendly greeting for its own sake. For these reasons, the act of greeting a dog from a distance, as though dogs enjoy social interactions with humans (in the way Doctor Doolittle the main character of a British fictional children’s story talked to animals [17] and, in the way people greet each other at a social gathering), is unacceptable, in most circles (i.e., except for researchers of ethology).
Animal Culture not Crucial to Survival
The following is a definition of animal culture from the literature: “a behavioural pattern of a group, derived from learning and/or mimicry with overall fitness benefits” [18]. However, a more comprehensive definition is used in this article and in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution from being central to an understanding of how species evolve in accordance with the theory of (cultural and) evolutionary freedom.5 Animal culture (for both plants and animals) is any: 1) Non-heritable behavioural pattern or 2) Heritable characteristic not crucial to survival.
There is some convincing evidence that a complex learned behaviour as a kind of animal culture can become heritable, see Section 3, the section titled “two kinds of joyful associations likely occurred in the evolution of elaborateness of courtship behaviour in the great crested grebe”. Insomuch the concept of animal culture is important to an understanding 1) Of why the Mebir has previously not been discovered. 2) How the Mebir provides evolutionary freedom (to social species). 3) As to how species (actually) evolve, (including higher intelligence), the evidence for animal culture (not crucial to survival) is reviewed hereunder (presented in depth in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution).
Evidence for Species Culture (as Defined in This Article), not Crucial to Survival22
The evidence for species culture in part comes from 1) Characteristics more elaborate than necessary for survival. 2) Elaborate characteristics (not crucial to survival), identified from comparative ecology between species with a comparable ecology, (including evidence for safety characteristics, which improve fitness but are not crucial to survival). 3) An inference as to how certain complex characteristics composed of many parts evolve, which to function, must act synergistically. As inferred, they first evolve randomly and independently as a kind of animal culture. 4) That species with exceptional evolutionary freedom tend to evolve elaborate characteristics. 5) Evidence for speciation unfolding as a function of species culture, reproductive isolation, and evolutionary freedom. 6) Evidence for how higher intelligence evolves in vertebrates, as a function of species culture, and evolutionary freedom, per accordance with the freedom to intellectualize theory. There are three mechanisms for animals manifesting heritable animal culture, not crucial to survival. As a function of 1) Sexual preferences, a displaced innate response and evolutionary freedom. 2) The evolution of simple and complex safety characteristics (which improve fitness high enough to not go vestigial). 3) From species compensating for difficulties that have become an intrinsic part of its’ life history, causing higher stress levels, which in certain species can result in a) an aggressive temperament, b) and the resulting evolution of defensive mechanisms and/or c) the resulting evolution of improvements in fitness (the evolution of safety characteristics) not crucial to survival (a kind of defensive mechanism).
Examples of Various Kinds of Heritable Animal Culture and How they Evolve
Examples of heritable animal culture not crucial to survival, and the likely mechanisms that brought them about (as presented in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution), include 1) From a study of comparative ecology between pheasant species, pheasants provide convincing evidence that defensive mechanisms can evolve to be pronounced (the evolution of enlarged spurs, not crucial to survival) as a function of intrusion of personal space (heightened stress levels) (mechanism 3), a) The unique to an orca pod feeding behaviour, of a specialized diet, which might be a heritable (and not a learned) behaviour, as inferred, is the result of an association of the joy of feeding on a certain kind of food with the pleasure of being in the group [19]. b) The unique (to a group) call behaviour manifested in orca and the sperm whale, which might be a heritable behaviour, as inferred, is the result of an association of the joy of communicating with a particular call, with the pleasure of being with a familiar group [19] (mechanism 1). 2) The evidence for elaborate characteristics not crucial to survival, (see (1), (2), and (4) above, (presented in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution). Elaborate characteristics evolve, as inferred, as a displaced innate response, out of enjoyment (mechanism 1). 3) The aggressive interactions between male humpback whales during the mating season. It is inferred that it experiences much stress from migrating great distances while fasting for months (mechanism 3). 4) Convincing evidence for close inter-species friendships between the common bottlenose dolphin and three other cetaceans (mechanism 1) (there is convincing evidence that common bottlenose dolphin interspecies close friendships are a function of a compatible personality). 5) There is convincing evidence that species with a matriarchal or matrilineal society and which have exceptional cultural and evolutionary freedom tend to have a less aggressive temperament, for example the bonobo chimpanzee has a matriarchal society, lives in an environment favourable to chimpanzee life, culture and evolution and has manifested a less aggressive temperament (mechanism 1). 6) Flightlessness and near flightlessness in various bird species in New Zealand, where over the course of evolution, there were no terrestrial predators (mechanism 1). 7) The extreme sexual dimorphism of many pinniped species, as inferred, evolved from intrusions of personal space, from a harem mating system which brings males to have restricted evolutionary freedom to maintain a small size (due to sparring during the mating season between male rivals) (mechanism 3). 8) Interestingly, for the elephant seal, which has exceptionally aggressive interactions between males due to intrusions of personal space in rookeries (as indicated from a chest shield of calloused skin), this likely brought about a highly evolved physiology compared to other marine mammals (mechanism 3). The book entitled “Elephant Seals. Pushing the Limits on Land and Sea” [20] describes their highly evolved physiology. 9) There is evidence that an ability to reason evolves via sexual preferences (mechanism 1) and evolutionary freedom, including from reduced conflict between conspecifics, see Subsection 3.7. 10) Poisonous species can evolve to be more lethal than necessary for their survival (mechanism 2). 11) The short-finned pilot whale, harbor porpose, harbor seal, and bonobo chimpanzee have reduced stress and reduced aggressive interactions. (mechanism 1). 12) The exceptional complexity of the song of certain bird species, such as the nightingale, and of the common bottlenose dolphin (mechanism 1). 13) There is evidence for role playing when hunting in the wolf see Subsection 3.7 and common bottlenose dolphin, see Section 5, the section titled “evidence for common bottlenose dolphin culture”. This hunting behaviour as inferred, is a function of higher intelligence; higher intelligence in vertebrates is shown to evolve following the freedom to intellectualize theory (mechanism 1), see Subsection 3.7, the section titled “the freedom to intellectualize theory”.
A Test-Run of an Experiment for Evidence for the Mebir
![]()
Figure 1. From a video of a maltese dog taken for a walk. In Figures 1-4 I stand between two sets of the same objects (an identical toy dog and red ball, spaced 10 meters apart) taking a video. In Figure 1 the Maltese dog being walked along a path has perked ears (from seeing me and/or the first set of objects).
![]()
Figure 2. Curiosity about a toy dog. It approaches the first set of two sets of objects in a row.
![]()
Figure 3. #1A mild interest in toy dog. In Figure 3 and Figure 4 without a friendly greeting from methe dog shows little interest in the toy dog and ball.
![]()
Figure 5. I give the dog a warm greeting. Just before this section of the video was taken I positioned myself behind the second set of objects and gave it a warm greeting.
![]()
Figure 6. It sees the second toy dog in a row. After having received a friendly greeting the dog looks at the second set of objects with seemingly more perked ears than in Figure 1.
![]()
Figure 7. Heightened interest in the second, identical toy dog. It elicits an exceptionally exaggerated Mebir, i.e., has much interest in the toy dog after a friendly greeting, inferred from it pulling hard on the leash to sniff the toy dog. Tail is erect (Photo editing was done in Figures 1-7 to mask the dog’s identity and in Figures 3-5 or Figure 6 to mask the owner’s identity).
2. Results
Evidence for the Mebir (i.e., for improved effectiveness of behaviour from a friendly greeting) comes from 1) The two null hypotheses (of this article) being disproved. 2) Decades of observation of dog behavioural responses to my friendly greetings. 3) Brubaker’s research which shows that learning in dogs is improved with social interactions with humans [11]. 4) Ohkita’s research which shows that dog “dog owner” gazing increases the durations of dog whining and looking at the owner’s face [13]. 5) The evidence that gquic psychology (if permitted), based on the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive, and non-aggressive, is more effective, see Subsection 1.2.2 (for example, in solving societal problems which require the general public gain knowledge for the social problem to be solved, see Subsection 1.2.1, the section titled “it is critical that gquic psychology is used to solve certain societal problems”. Gquic psychology is shown to also be speedier, safer and less disruptive than Darwinian psychology, see Subsections 1.1.1 and 1.2.2. 6) Evidence that the social-friendly teaching method, based on gquic psychology, is more effective, see Subsections 1.2, # (2), and 1.2.1. That one kind of Mebir of dogs is improved learning suggests that the Mebir is in part responsible for the greater effectiveness of the social-friendly teaching mehod and gquic psychology. 7) Songbird song responses to my bird calls and improvisations, including that certain songbird species were incited to sing, to partially mimic my bird calls and one songbird species, the solitary vireo, seemed to become more creative in song. 8) My observation that many species of animal possibly have a Mebir, see Subsection 1.3. 9) That my improvisations (of music) seemingly are of better quality with a friendly audience (in contrast with my improvising in the darkness of night, out of doors alone. 10) (In US) that captive common bottlenose dolphins prefer being with children over being with adults [21] suggests that the social-playful greetings and gestures and curiosity of children bring the common bottlenose dolphin to have the Mebir innate response of heightened curiosity (that is like the Mebir innate responses of dogs of heightened curiosity).
2.1. Assessment of Two Null Hypotheses
My data come from chance encounters with dogs taken for a walk on a sidewalk in a naturalistic setting, including various breeds, mixed breeds, both sexes and dogs of different ages. The first null hypothesis tested: A friendly greeting does not cause a dog to be more effective in behaviour. This hypothesis was proven invalid suggesting that warm greetings tend to cause dogs to undergo a Mebir. Only exaggerated and unusual (displaced innate hunting behaviours) observed within a minute after a friendly greeting (and that were not seen a minute before a friendly greeting) were counted as a Mebir (improved effectiveness of behaviour). If I saw an exaggerated behaviour or a displaced innate hunting response before giving the dog a greeting, this voided my being able to use the dog in the data set.
The second null hypothesis tested: From a warm greeting, a dog does not walk faster or pull on the leash. When a dog did not walk faster and engage in other kinds of Mebir innate responses this data was voided from the data set. See Chart 1 for the behavioural outcome not used from the other Mebir responses possibly making a dog preoccupied so that it neglected to walk faster. The second hypothesis was proven invalid, suggesting dogs tend to undergo the Mebir innate response of walking faster.
Chart 1. The kinds of Behavioural outcomes used, for the second hypothesis.
2.2. The Details of Chai Square Test
The first null hypothesis, that dogs do not undergo a Mebir innate response from a friendly greeting, was rejected with chai-square statistics [22], N = 50, X2 = 2269, P = 10.83 with 0.1% significance and 1 d.f.23 The second null hypothesis, that dogs do not walk faster from a warm greeting, was rejected N = 29, X2 = 647, P = 10.83 with 0.1% significance and 1 d.f. In general, there were four kinds of responses to a friendly greeting. The stimulation of 1) Higher cognition, including of greater creativity, curiosity, exploring, learning, play behaviour, and/or perhaps heightened concentration. 2) Of increased sociality. 3) Of increases in the effectiveness of physical (motor) behaviour, and of 4) Displaced innate behaviours.
3. Discussion
Seeing as though the data I gathered was from various dog breeds, mixed breeds, both sexes, and all ages the data as inferred, represents dogs as a species (Canis familiaris) and their ancestral wolf species (Canis lupus). Many dogs gave a dramatic behavioural response to a friendly greeting, while a few elicited a weakened, “more effective behavioural response”. Certain dog breeds may be more inclined to “elicit an extreme Mebir response, such as the Maltese breed and certain may be less inclined. My gazes at dogs, clapping my hands repeatedly, making gentle clicking sounds, a gentle, ringing sound with a high-toned cycle
![]()
Table 1. Frequency of the kinds of Mebir responses.
![]()
Table 2. The evidence for the Mebir being a hormonal (likley oxytocin) mediated response includes the evidence that the Mebir is enjoyable, the many kinds of Mebir responses, and that the Mebir responses are commonly extreme, including 1. Dramatic increases in the effectiveness of physical (motor) behaviour, and 2. The stimulation of higher cognition and social interactions.
The elaborate mating behaviour of the great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus) in part consists of other innate behaviours of its’ behavioural repertoire. Their mating behaviour in part consists of a head shake (a behaviour that communicates a threat) and appeasement movements [24]. Their elaborate mating behaviour (B), if innate, as inferred, likely evolved initially 1) as a function of the species’ non-conscious association of the joy of courtship and mating (a kind of social-friendly greeting-gesture) (A1) to the joy of performing the headshake to communicate a threat, (B1) i.e., the joy of being competitive in a stressful situation27 and the joy of appeasement movements (B2). 2) I hypothesize, the resulting elaborate courtship behaviour became established as a behavioural pattern as a kind of animal culture not crucial to survival from a second kind of an association, an association of the displaced innate behaviour during courtship (of (B1) and (B2)) with the joy of being in a group (or with other members of the species), (for a review of evidence for animal culture not crucial to survival see Subsection 1.3, the Section entitled: evidence for species culture not crucial to survival). 3) I hypothesize, that the elaborate culture (B) of the mating ritual possibly becomes an innate behaviour (C) from a new gene manifested, for a new behaviour that happens to mimic (B), (the animal culture of the more elaborate mating ritual).
The Importance of the Mebir, Social Consciousness and Four kinds of Dog Mebirs
For the following six reasons the Mebir and a high level of social consciousness are of importance to society suggesting that four kinds of dog Mebir responses listed below are also of importance). As inferred, the Mebir and a high level of social consciousness are of importance to society, from: 1) Evidence for the Mebir innate response in humans, see Section 2. 2) The evidence that humans are a social species and are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive (see Subsection 1.1.1). 3) Evidence that gquic psychology is more effective, speedier, safer, less disruptive and is more desirable (if allowed) than Darwinian psychology, see Subsection 1.2.2). Gquic psychology is based on the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, see Subsections 1.1.1. It elicits the Mebir itself. 4) Evidence for the social-friendly teaching method being more effective, see Subsections 1.2, # (2), 1.2.1, which is also based on the above-mentioned theorem. It also elicits the Mebir itself. 5) That the behavioural Mebir responses are commonly exceptionally exaggerated (see Table 2). 6) The evidence that the Mebir provides animal species with cultural and evolutionary freedom, see Subsection 3.6.
The above-mentioned evidence that the Mebir and a high level of social consciousness ought to be idealized for society suggest that these three kind of Mebir responses in dogs are of relevance to society: 1) That a friendly greeting makes a dog walk faster (and that cheerleading is used in sports competitions) indicates that nations with a high level of social consciousness have an advantage from the worker being highly motivated to work simply from society being in harmony with human nature. 2) That a friendly greeting helps a dog to learn [11] and to be creative and to seek social affiliation suggests that the social-friendly teaching method (see Subsection 1.2 and 1.2.1) is of importance to society (for evidence that it is more effective, see Subsections 1.2 # (2) and 1.2.1) and that a high level of social consciousness is vital to education and societal development. 3) That a friendly greeting brings a dog to be explorative and to seek social affiliation suggests that with high levels of social consciousness, if the worker has varied and enjoyable work with different interesting and compatible work comrades (companions)28, this would help fulfil the worker’s desire to explore, i.e., to have friendly, interesting social interactions.29
How the Mebir Evolved
As inferred from the freedom to intellectualize theory, introduced in Subsection 3.6, the section entitled “the freedom to intellectualize theory”, the Mebir innate response from a friendly greeting (and associated feeling of well-being, (see Section 3, the section titled the evidence for the Mebir being associated with a feeling of well-being)) either evolved 1) As a function of sexual preferences, from “more effective behavioral responses” being sexually preferred, or, 2) from the Mebirimproving fitness (i.e., improved effectiveness of behaviour). For how the Mebir provides cultural and evolutionary freedom see Subsection 3.6, the section below, and Section 5.
Two Ways the Mebir Provides Social Species with Cultural and Evolutionary Freedom to Evolve Higher Intelligence (in Accordance with the Freedom to Intellectualize Theory) Both the theory of (cultural and) evolutionary freedom and the freedom to intellectualize theory provide supporting evidence that evolution, (including of higher intelligence) is a function of species culture and evolutionary freedom, not selection (I introduce and provide evidence for these two theories in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution.5 The evidence for the Mebir providing social species with cultural and evolutionary freedom from improved effectiveness of behaviour see Subsection 3.6 suggests that evolutionary freedom could be of importance to the evolution of higher intelligence in social species, which there is evidence for from the freedom to intellectualize theory being more robust than the social competition theory (in explaining to how higher intelligence evolves), see Subsection 3.6, the section titled “the freedom to intellectualize theory”. The evolution of higher intelligence requires exceptional evolutionary freedom to evolve, from being of detriment to survival, due to the manifestation of behaviours which attract predators or distract a species from being on the lookout for predators. As inferred, the evolution of higher intelligence in vertebrates can evolve from (a) exceptional evolutionary freedom and improvements in fitness, without selection occurring (in the evolution of safety characteristics), or as a function of (b) sexual preferences (a displaced innate response)) and evolutionary freedom, without selection occurring (e.g., evolutionary freedom from heavy predatory impact), which there is evidence for in certain mammalian species. The evolution of an ability to reason is shown to evolve as a function of sexual preferences, a friendship-favourable group composition and a reduction of aggressive interactions between conspecifics. Two ways the Mebir can help a species to become highly evolved cognitively via sexual preferences, include 1) From the Mebir helping to delineate the personality of the individuals of a group, upon which sexual preferences act upon. I discovered the Mebir makes a dog’s personality highly noticeable from my observations of dog behaviour when collecting data to provide evidence for the existence of the Mebir in dogs. Researchers have shown that many animal species have individual differences in personality between conspecifics, that an individual can exhibit consistency in behaviours across time or ecological contexts [25]. The wolf has a unique personality between conspecifics [26] [27], suggesting that sexual preferences in wolves (when a female and male meet to become a monogamous pair) may have been of importance to the evolution of their apparent higher intelligence (see Subsection 3.2 for evidence of wolf higher intelligence). 2) The Mebir provides greater evolutionary freedom for higher intelligence to evolve from providing greater effectiveness of behaviour, e.g., including improvements in a species’ ability to defend itself and engage in cooperative behaviours, allowing for the evolution of characteristics that require greater evolutionary freedom to evolve, including play and creative behaviour (in the adult), higher cognitive ability, and an ability to reason. These are of detriment to survival from attracting predators (play behaviours in the adult is known for attracting predators) and from distracting a species from being on the lookout for predators.
Friendly Greetings and Gestures Commonly Release the Mebir
The individuals of a wolf pack are likely commonly (non-consciously), engaging in friendly greetings (even outside of when actively meeting up after having been separated), inferred from their affectionate behaviours, see Figure 8 and Figure 9. People are commonly giving friendly greetings when communicating affection, if only in body language and in intonation of speech. As inferred, public servants who have a high level of social consciousness elicit the Mebir in those they are helping. Despite the Mebir commonly being released in a social gathering and is commonly released in nations with a high level of social consciousness, in capitalist nations the Mebir often is used in manipulative ways for personal gain. As inferred, the fundamental reason for this and for the advent of capitalism itself (despite humans having been shown to be loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, see Subsection 1.1.1), is, as inferred the rise of materialism 10,000 years ago, with the advent of the agrarian mode of existence, due to the establishment of settlements, that resulted in both the accumulation of both material goods and wealth and, a pronounced unequal distribution of the wealth.
3.1. The Exaggerated and Exceptionally Exaggerated Mebir
Behavioural responses include pulling hard on a leash, walking much faster, a heightened interest in exploring, curiosity about objects, perhaps heightened concentration and an interest in being creative, affectionate or playful with dogs, people, and the owner. For a table of frequency of Mebir responses and exaggerated responses see Table 1 and Table 2. A dog’s levels of enthusiasm in response to a friendly greeting included: Level 1 Indifference (which was infrequent). Level 2 A mild, timid response. Level 3 A behavioural response without enthusiasm, Level 4 With enthusiasm, and Level 5 With much enthusiasm. I observed all five levels of enthusiasm. However, levels 4 and 5 were so common and intense (see Table 2), this suggests that the Mebir is of much importance to social species and society. For the evidence the Mebir is of importance to society, see Section 3, the section titled “the importance of the Mebir, social consciousness and four dog Mebirs to society”. Seemingly perceptions of the environment and innate behaviours which are enjoyable become more enjoyable with a friendly greeting.
3.2. Dog Displaced Innate Responses and Wolf Intelligence
Researchers have shown that domesticated dogs and wolves are similar genetically [28], suggesting that wolves are the ancestors of dogs. One kind of behavioural response that dogs elicit from a friendly greeting is displaced innate hunting responses that helps wolves to locate prey items more easily, which improves wolf fitness. Despite convincing evidence that wolves have complex innate hunting behaviours (inferred from the invoked displaced innate hunting responses of dogs as a Mebir, (from friendly greetings)) (see next section), there is convincing evidence that wolves are a highly intelligent species of social carnivore, from their ways of hunting: 1) With likely role-playing in hunting and 2) They seemingly manifest wolf culture (between regions of wolf packs) in how they hunt. Evidence for role-playing includes that the individuals of a pack can flank a prey item when in pursuit. This behaviour seemingly prevents the prey from escaping [29] (statistical evidence is needed to show that flanking is not but a random event). For one population, speedy, lightly built females are taking on herding roles, darting back and forth in front of prey, causing confusion, and preventing the prey from escaping [30]. There are other cited observations of possible wolf cooperative behaviour [31] however, again, without statistics, it is impossible to distinguish between cooperative behaviour versus chance associations that improves fitness. Evidence for wolf culture includes that the adult, breeding male of a pack (a pack consists of closely related wolves), can initiate a hunt (but does not always do so) [32], which perhaps at times are selecting the prey item the pack pursues [30]. The female of the Yellowstone wolf pack does most of the decision-making including where to travel and when to rest and hunt (according to Doug Smith, a natural scientist, project leader for the Yellowstone Gray Wolf Restoration Project (reference available upon request)). Research on the ecology of the gray wolf in Scandinavia [33] suggests that the choice of the kind of prey item when hunting is male influenced; the male prefers larger prey, moose (Alcesalces) (over roe deer (Capreolus capreolus)), which as inferred, improves wolf fitness. The female’s preference for roe deer is a function of wolf culture either from her preferring less stress or is due to the limitations of her hunting ability. Accounts for wolf intelligence from the literature, but which does not indicate their relative intelligence, come from scattered reports of their behaviours [27], suggesting that they have a good memory, associate events, and learn.
Three Kinds of Displaced Innate Hunting Responses as a Dog Mebir
From a friendly greeting, I observed three kinds of dog innate hunting behaviours, as a Mebir response, which are the result of an innate wolf behaviour which aids wolves to more easily locate prey items, i.e., improves wolf fitness. I hypothesize that these three displaced innate hunting behaviours were elicited from a non-conscious association of the joy of performing the innate hunting behaviour (a kind of exploration behaviour) (A) with the joy of receiving a friendly greeting (B). (For the evidence for the Mebirbeingin part a function of enjoyment, see Section 3, the Section titled “the evidence for the Mebir being associated with a feeling of well-being”). The three displaced innate responses included: 1) A zigzag wandering walk while sniffing the ground. 2) Sniffing the air for the scent of something while waving the head back and forth. 3) Veering off to the side suddenly with much force. The following dog Mebirs from a friendly greeting may also be a function of a displaced innate hormonal response, the stimulation of curiosity, sociality, and creative, playful, assertive, and explorative behaviours. With respect to the Mebir response of improved learning, this is possibly the result of a dog’s association of the enjoyment associated with a social experience and the Mebir with the enjoyment of perceiving something innately attractive to them, in the environment, which incidentally improves learning from improved observation, rather than being the result of an innate response of improved learning from a friendly greeting. With respect to a dog’s veering (suddenly) off to the side innate response (or down a side path or street, and through an open door) observed on ten of fifty trials, see Table 2, which happened with a level of 4 or 5 enthusiasm (for a description of the various levels of enthusiasm of a dog’s Mebir see Section 3.1), this innate behaviour in wolves may improve wolf fitness in the following way. From better helping the wolf pack to surround and capture prey, i.e., from improved cooperative hunting success of large, fast prey (so that all the wolves in a pack increase efficiency of capturing a prey item from more effectively surrounding it). Convincing evidence for this hypothesis comes from a study of the hunting strategies of wolves. One of the rules wolves follow when hunting is that when they are close enough to a prey item in pursuit, the wolves of the pack move away from each other [30], suggesting that keeping a distance between individuals of a pack is of importance to hunting (foraging) success. The veering off to the side innate behaviour may have in part also evolved from helping wolves to escape predators.30
3.3. An Ethogram of the More Interesting Dog Mebir Responses
The Mebir dog responses from a friendly greeting include multiple Mebir responses in (quick) succession, (intriguing to witness), including:
1) Sniffing (curiously) at an object on the ground, then walking faster while exploring the vicinity.
2) Sniffing around the sidewalk for a long time and then pulling hard on the leash.
3) Being more social with its’ owner, then seeking to be social with unacquainted pedestrians while walking at a faster pace and becoming curious about the environment.
A dog can have the Mebir of seeking social affiliation (see Table 2). In wolves this Mebir response improves fitness from strengthening social bonds.
On six of fifty trials the Mebir innate response was observed of creative or playful behaviour.
Dogs tend to walk faster from a friendly greeting.
A Mebir response included a dog pulling on the leash with great effort to go forward at times to go in a different direction than where it was headed, or to cease going forward (this later response I observed on many occasions outside of gathering data). On one occasion a dog pulled on the leash to be with me. On another occasion I not unlikely observed dog motor mimicry of my movement.
A friendly greeting can make a dog curious, explorative, affectionate (e.g., it can be affectionate in gently nudging its’ owner with its nose), and possibly can at times make a dog concentrate more (i.e., after giving a dog a greeting I observed that perhaps it focused its’ attention on gazing, (without distraction) at the front gate of their owner’s residence, for the gate to be opened). From observing dog Mebirs, including their creative, affectionate, and playful behaviours, and that they may be at time concentrate intensely on what they are doing, may cause some people to mistakenly anthropomorphize dog intelligence. For the convincing evidence that wolves (and dogs) do not have an ability to reason, see Subsections 3.5 and 3.8.
3.4. The Importance of the Mebir to Political Ideology
The evidence that the Mebir is of importance to society is presented in Section 3, (the section titled “the importance of the Mebir, social consciousness and four dog Mebirs to society”) and Section 5 (the section titled “considerations from the discovery of the Mebir…”). In part, the evidence that the Mebir (i.e., that improved effectiveness of behaviour from a friendly greeting)is of importance to society, comes from the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive (see Subsection 1.1.1) and the greater effectiveness of gquic psychology, suggesting that these following political goals are of importance (from being in harmony with human nature and eliciting the Mebir): 1) Communism and socialism (they are in harmony with human nature from not being an exploitive system of government). 2) A high level of social consciousness. 3) The social-friendly teaching method. 4) Gquic psychology31 both elicit the Mebir and both are based on the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, both are more effective, which are presently used in part, in nations with a high level of social consciousness. 5) A comprehensive social welfare system. 6) A new United Nations based upon gquic psychology (forwhy a new kind of United Nations is crucial to there being a sustainable world peace and to solving global (health and safety) problems see the video I made [9] [10]. Insomuch I have shown the Mebirto be of importance to society, this will bring the scientific community to more readily accept the two new theories of evolution I formulated and found conclusive evidence for, from their 1) Providing an essential line of evidence for humans being loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, and 2) Proof that evolution is a function of species culture and evolutionary freedom, not selection.
3.5. The Wolf’s Evolutionary Freedom to Evolve Higher Intelligence and Restricted Evolutionary Freedom to Evolve an Ability to Reason
Wolves have exceptional evolutionary freedom to evolve higher intelligence from 1) Reduced predatory impact. 2) Cooperative hunting (evidence for cooperative behaviour reducing aggressive interactions in mammals is included in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution). 3) Wolves are a highly social species, such that their Mebir provides them with exceptional cultural-evolutionary freedom. However, wolves have restricted evolutionary freedom to evolve an ability to reason due to conflict between conspecifics, for example from intrusions of personal space when feeding, as explained in Section 3.8 and Figure 10, in part indicated from reduced eye contact between conspecifics.
3.6. Both Sociality and the Mebir Provide Evolutionary Freedom
There is convincing evidence that wolves are highly intelligent, see Subsection 3.2 and have exceptional evolutionary freedom, see Subsection 3.5. The photographs of wolves in Figure 8 and Figure 9 are of wolves interacting in an affectionate, creative, playful, and tactile manner, i.e., depict 1) their social-friendly behaviours that elicit the Mebir and/or 2) possibly depict the Mebir (from a friendly wolf gesture). In so much sociality provides cultural and evolutionary freedom from improving fitness more than necessary for survival (the evidence for this is presented in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution and is reviewed below), the Mebir which improves the effectiveness of behaviour (including sociality) also provides cultural and evolutionary freedom.
The Freedom to Intellectualize Theory. Evidence for the Freedom to Intellectualize Theory in Part Comes from Sociality Providing Exceptional Evolutionary Freedom
In accordance with the freedom to intellectualize theory species need evolutionary
![]()
Figure 8. The affectionate, creative, tactile, and playful behaviours of the wolves in Figure 8 and Figure 9 release the Mebir innate response, of greater effectiveness of behaviour. That wolves seldom make eye contact suggests underlying tensions between conspecifics. Wolves are known for engaging in social play behaviour [34].
freedom to evolve higher intelligence, because for one reason, behaviours that are the result of higher cognitive ability attract predators (similarly, play behaviours in the adult are known to attract predators), or distract a species from being on the lookout for predators. The evidence that sociality provides species with cultural and evolutionary freedom i.e., improves fitness more than necessary includes 1) The evidence that improved sociality likely evolves in a positive feedback loop, (within the confines of a species’ evolutionary freedom) from convincing evidence that it is possible for improvements in sociality to evolve as a function of sexual preferences, in part a) coming from evidence for existence of social rewards, such that it is possible that increases in sociality could be sexually preferred (as a displaced innate response) and, b) the evidence that a displaced innate responses can affect evolution (as a function of sexual preferences): i) including the evidence for the existence of elaborate characteristics (see Subsection 1.3, the section titled “evidence for species culture…”) and ii) the evidence that the evolution of an ability to reason (initially) evolves as a function of sexual preferences (i.e., as a function of a displaced innate response, see Subsection 3.7) and exceptional evolutionary freedom. Another line of evidence that sociality provides social species with cultural and evolutionary freedom includes 2) The evidence for the social brain hypothesis [35] which states that a larger brain evolves in social species, for example in social primates. Carnivores are an exception [36], as inferred, due to non-social carnivores having exceptional evolutionary freedom from heavy predatory impact as the result of being a predator, to evolve greater encephalization, from sociability providing carnivores with no substantial additional protection from predation to evolve higher intelligence. The accepted mechanism of the social brain hypothesis as stated in the literature, “that computational demands of living in highly complex social groups selected for overall increases in brain volume” [35] is refuted by the robust evidence for (the evolution of) greater encephalization as a function of evolutionary freedom and species culture, rather than as a function of social competition, i.e., from the study of comparative ecology and the more robust evidence for the freedom to intellectualize theory than for the social competition theory. Additional evidence that sociality provides social species with cultural and evolutionary freedom includes 3) The freedom to intellectualize theory being more robust than the social competition theory in explaining how higher intelligence evolves, i.e., there is a tendency for vertebrate species with exceptional evolutionary freedom evolving higher intelligence, while there is scanty evidence for the social competition theory, for example, there are intelligent cetaceans with a low intra and inter specific aggression (between conspecifics when mating),32 and certain highly intelligent animals do not have heavy predatory impact, intense inter-specific competition over food items nor intense intra-specific competition over food items, such as manatees, elephants and gorillas which the social competition theory does not explain. 4) The evolution of curiosity, play behaviour and, creative behaviour (in the adult), (like the evolution of higher cognitive ability) require exceptional evolutionary freedom from heavy predatory impact to evolve (as reviewed in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution). Social species commonly have manifested these behaviours suggesting that sociality provides exceptional evolutionary freedom.
![]()
Figure 9. A social-friendly gesture and creative behaviour of “wolf A” touching “wolf B” is possibly a Mebir innate response from a friendly gesture of “B”. There is convincing evidence that a warm gesture elicits creative-play behaviour in dogs (see the ethogram, Subsection 3.3 and Table 2). The photographs of this article release the Mebir in the reader (from depicting the Mebirin dogs and the social-friendly behaviours of wolves).
The Mebir Provides Exceptional Cultural and Evolutionary Freedom
Insomuch sociality provides exceptional cultural and evolutionary freedom, the Mebir which improves the effectiveness of sociality, does so as well. In addition, there is convincing evidence that the Mebir is a hormonal mediated response, see Subsection 1.3, the section titled “the Mebir is possibly an oxytocin hormonal mediated response”, that improves the effectiveness of many kinds of behaviours (improves fitness), commonly in dramatic ways. Thus it is not unlikely that the Mebir is not crucial to survival in many of the ways it improvers fitness, (commonly in dramatic ways), i.e., it’s likely that the Mebir provides cultural and evolutionary freedom.
3.7. Mechanisms of the Evolution of an Ability to Reason
In Subsections 3.7 - 3.8 I introduce 1) How “an ability to reason” evolves (in accordance with the freedom to intellectualize theory); as a function of evolutionary freedom, (including from improved sociality from reduced conflict between conspecifics and a friendship-favourable group composition), sexual preferences, and a displaced innate response; rather than as a function of selection or social competition). 2) Evidence for the wolf not having an ability to reason, see Subsection 3.8, so the reader does not mistakenly idealize self-initiated unkindness as the result of a) The evidence for dogs becoming aggressive from a warm greeting when territorial, b) Wolves exhibiting acts of aggression,(despite displays of affection resembling human affection (see Figure 8 and Figure 9), and despite that dogs exhibit the Mebir), (improvements in effectiveness of behaviour from a friendly greeting) which seems human-like. 3) The misconception from the (refuted) concept of natural selection that humans are unloving, aggressive, and competitive. For the evidence that humans have a peaceful composure see Subsection 1.1.1. The evidence that wolves likely do not have an ability to reason, per the freedom to intellectualize theory, (this theory shows that reduced conflict is needed for an ability to reason to evolve), comes in part from, their aggressive temperament, and the non-symbolic artwork of more highly intelligent animals with a higher encephalization quotient than wolves. Wolf aggressive interactions occur when feeding, and conspecifics commonly use various kinds of body language to communicate aggression and fear, including starring to communicate aggression and looking away to communicate fear [37]. Though staring non-aggressively is found in the great apes, it is not known to frequently occur in wolves [38]. That primate species which are more tolerant of gazes are more egalitarian [39] suggests that the the low frequency of wolf non-aggressive staring is due to underlying tensions between wolf conspecifics.
How an Ability to Reason Evolved in Humans Per the Freedom to Intellectualize Theory
As a review, the evidence that the ability to reason evolves following the freedom to intellectualize theory, as a function of sexual preferences, and exceptional evolutionary freedom, includes: 1) The more robust evidence for “the freedom to intellectualize theory” than for the social competition theory, as explained previously in Subsection 3.6. 2) The evidence for the social brain hypothesis [35]. 3) And that the ability to reason has not evolved in four highly intelligent species, (i.e., as inferred from their artwork, which as inferred is not symbolic of anything, including the artwork of two species of chimpanzee, the gorilla and the elephant), and their having restricted evolutionary freedom (as in accordance with freedom to intellectualize theory) from having aggressive interactions between conspecifics or, from a lack of the pronounced friendship-favourable group composition, for sexual preferences to come into play (e.g., the harbour porpoise and short-finned pilot wale have a peaceful composure but do not have a pronounced friendship-favourable group composition of the Atlantic, coastal common bottlenose dolphin).
Detailed Mechanisms of the Evolution of an Ability to Reason
The following behaviours are shown to be of importance to the evolution of an ability to reason (as a function of sexual preferences) 1) A distinctive personality, and/or behavioural patterns not crucial to survival (i.e., animal culture). 2) Acts of compassion and therapy, if only that relieves boredom. 3) Possibly, a higher frequency of a) affectionate, b) creative, and c) playful behaviour. 4) A friendship-favourable group composition. 5) Reduced intra-specific aggressive interactions. 6) A high degree of sociality and the Mebir, they provide cultural and evolutionary freedom, in part from improving the effectiveness of behaviour. 7) Cooperative behaviour, if present. 8) Reduced stress from a favourable ecology. 9) Eye contact as a friendly gesture (which humans, chimpanzees and the gorilla engage in [38] [39] and I suspect the common bottlenose dolphin engages in from their having a flexible neck), however, prolonged eye contact can communicate a threat [37].
Considering which behaviours our ancient hominid ancestors were attracted to in the evolution of an ability to reason per the freedom to intellectualize theory (as a function of sexual preferences, and evolutionary freedom, including from reduced conflict between conspecifics). It was not simply the presence of 1) Affectionate; 2) Creative; 3) Tactile; 4) Playful; 5) Non-aggressive behaviour (depicted in Figure 8 and Figure 9); which wolves (and other mammals without an ability to reason) manifest, but likely in addition were acts of therapy, if only but to relieve boredom in another individual,33 compassion, and/or a higher frequency of 1 - 5, for example, in the creative song and dance of our hominid ancestors. (An ability to reason likely evolved in Homo erectus as inferred from their having evolved much encephalization and their use of fire, and having made complex tool and body adornments), there is convincing evidence that they had egalitarian tendencies and a friendship favourable group composition.34 For how the common bottlenose dolphin has exceptional evolutionary freedom, including from a friendship-favourable group composition, and the evidence that they likely have evolved an ability to reason, see the video I made [9] [10], Subsection 1.1.1, # (4) and Section 5, #5.
Acts of Compassion and Therapy Are Desirable to Animals without an Ability to Reason
In the evolution of an ability to reason there is evidence that acts of compassion and therapy of an individual which inherits an ability to reasonare attractive to those (intra- and inter-specific individuals) without it. Evidence includes: 1) That it is relatively easy to make songbirds and dogs have a dramatic Mebir, for birds, from inciting them to sing from my improvised music, and to bring workers to be better motivated to work (from an act of compassion and therapy (personal observation)). Sometimes songbirds follow me in flight through the foliage of trees, chirping as they go, after I sing to them, suggesting that they are curious about me. Convincing evidence that acts of compassion and therapy are attractive to individuals and animal species without an ability to reason also comes from 2) Convincing evidence for common bottlenose dolphin interspecies close friendships, as presented in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution. I provide compelling evidence the common bottlenose dolphin has an ability to reason, (from their unique exceptional cultural and evolutionary freedom, their kinds of interspecies close friendships, their complex song, and peaceful composure between conspecifics, see the video I made [9] [10]), which likely has determined their kinds of close interspecies friendships. Despite that the species of cetacean they have a close interspecies friendship with likely cannot reason (inferred from their aggressive temperament and/or less friendship-favourable group composition), nevertheless, the personality of the cetacean species which the common bottlenose dolphin has an interspecies friendship with is compatible with the common bottlenose dolphin’s personality. This suggests that in the evolution of an ability to reason, acts of compassion and therapy of an individual which happens to inherit an ability to reason can be desirable to the members of the species which have not yet inheritedit. 3) Even after discounting the vast number of species that are not competitive in nature from having a high density of populations, overt aggression is lacking among most species that compete. Animals prefer pacifism and bluff34 over escalated fighting [40]. I provide evidence that animals prefer reduced stress in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution, for example. 4) The bonobo (chimpanzee) lives in an environment favourable to chimpanzee life, culture and evolution and has reduced aggressive interactions, suggesting species prefer less conflict, that stress causes aggression and, that acts of compassion and therapy would be attractive to species that acquires an ecology that provides a reduction in stress (and a reduction in aggressive interactions). For example, in a species with the advent of cooperative foraging, no intrusions of personal space when feeding and/or a friendship-favourable group composition. 5) There are bird species of New Zealand which are flightless, and some are nearly so, where they have had cultural freedom from heavy terrestrial predatory impact, suggesting that animals prefer less stress, that animals with cultural freedom would not unlikely be attracted to acts of compassion and therapy.
3.8. Wolves Likely Do Not Have an Ability to Reason
For convincing evidence that wolves are highly intelligent, see Subsection 3.2. For the evidence that dogs and humans have a Mebir see Section 2. Thus, the Mebirlikely evolved in species without an ability to reason (in wolves) and with (in Homo sapiens). The evidence that the wolves have restricted cultural and evolutionary freedom to evolve an ability to reason comes from 1) Evidence that species with a higher encephalization quotient than the wolf’s do not have an ability to reason, from their artwork, including from the chimpanzee, the gorilla, and elephant. The encephalization quotient of the wolf (Canus lupus) 1.08, is significantly less than the chimpanzee (Pan sp.) 2, the common bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncates 4.52), and elephant (Elephus sp.) 2.22 [41].35 2) Wolves do not have the friendship favourable group composition of the Atlantic, coastal common bottlenose dolphins which provided this delphinid with unique, exceptional evolutionary freedom. 3) Per the freedom to intellectualize theory, an ability to reason evolves as a function of reduced conflict between conspecifics, which nomadic hunters and gathers and the common bottlenose dolphin have, yet wolves have an aggressive temperament when feeding, restricting its’ cultural and evolutionary freedom. Most highly intelligent species have restricted evolutionary freedom to evolve an ability to reason from an aggressive temperament, for example during courtship, or when feeding, including (Subfamily Otariinae (seals and sealions), the African grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus), primates, elephants and genus Corvus (crows and ravens).
In nature, wolves hunt cooperatively, which likely, as my book provides evidence for, reduces conflict between conspecifics; adult wolves surprisingly are known to have a somewhat good-natured temperament [27], and wolves engage in affectionate, creative, tactile, and playful social interactions (see Figure 8 and Figure 9). Despite this, they also engage in aggressive interactions see Figure 10, (and certain individuals are known for being bolder than others [42]). In Figure 10 the adult captive wolf on the left is eating a carcass the zoo provided while the wolf on the right is baring its teeth and is perhaps snarling (it has a wrinkle on its’ muzzle). Though the two wolves in Figure 10 live at a zoo so their behaviours are not, as inferred, the same as in nature; I have found evidence that aggressive interactions occur between conspecific wolves in nature when they feed near each other on the same carcass, as sourced from three Internet videos. That acts of aggression occur when wolves feed together though there be much food present suggests they experience intrusion of personal space when eating. Wolves likely undergo some degree of stress (due to conflict between conspecifics) even when not feeding together. Staring non-aggressively occurs in the great apes, it is not known to often occur in wolves [38]. Primate species which are more tolerant of gazes are more egalitarian [39]. Thus, the low frequency of wolf non-aggressive staring suggests underlying tensions between wolf conspecifics.
![]()
Figure 10. Wolves likely do not have self-awareness, inferred from the artwork of highly intelligent species (without an ability to reason) with higher encephalization quotient, and acts of wolf aggression. Photographer of Figures 8-10 Emmanuel Keller, Switzerland. Figure 9 and Figure 10 courtesy of Getty Images. Figure 10 is photo edited.
3.9. The Social Brain Hypothesis is Substantiated
The social brain hypothesis is substantiated from evidence for {1} the Mebir, {2} two new theories of evolution, {3} that the Mebir provides social species with cultural and evolutionary freedom, and from primate species having a comparable ecology, while those which are social have evolved a large brain. A larger brain in social primates, as inferred, from being a kind of animal culture, not crucial to survival, i.e., from being a function of the Mebir and evolutionary freedom, is likely in part a safety characteristic (that improves fitness more than necessary). As inferred from the two new theories of evolution (as stated previously), non-social carnivores are the exception to the rule, do not seem to follow the social brain hypothesis from their having exceptional evolutionary freedom from heavy predatory impact to evolve a larger brain.
3.10. Solitary Species Which May Have a Mebir Innate Response
I hypothesize that some if not all solitary vertebrate species undergo a Mebir and that in nature, solitary vertebrate species do so less frequently than social species from having significantly fewer social interactions (restricting their evolutionary freedom). This best explains why social species (i.e., except non-social carnivores, from their having exceptional evolutionary freedom from heavy predatory impact) have a larger brain (see Subsection 3.6). For the evidence that the Mebir provides cultural and evolutionary freedom, see Section 3, the Section titled two ways the Mebir provides cultural and evolutionary freedom for social species to evolve higher intelligence…, Subsection 3.6 and Section 5. Cats, family Felidare are solitary hunters. Domestic cats perhaps undergo a Mebir; they not uncommonly scratch against something when first greeted (personal observation). Two shorebird species, the black-necked stilt (Himantopus mexicanus) and the great white heron (Ardea alba) are social, but often feed as solitary individuals (personal observation) seemingly undergo a Mebir (personal observation).
How the Mebir Evolved into Existence
That I maybe observed the Mebir in field crickets, frogs, a species of fish, shorebirds, ravens, crows and cats and with more certainty in songbirds, and humans, and that there is evidence for the dog Mebir, suggests the Mebir evolved in some ancestral fish that gave rise to terrestrial vertebrates, and in a marine arthropod that gave rise to insects, or evolved in an ancestral taxon (perhaps in acoelomates (e.g., in flatworms) or cnidarians (e.g., in jellyfish) that perceived an approach of a member of the species as a kind of greeting, and elicited a heritable more effective behaviour(from this improving fitness and/or as a function of sexual preferences), that gave rise to the Mebir in chordates and arthropods.
4. Methods
The dog Mebir is defined as a more effective behaviour (including unusual displaced innate hunting responses) that a warm greeting elicits (which improves fitness in wolves), i.e., not seen one minute before a dog’s arrival to where I would give it a friendly greeting, about three meters away.36 For a more effective behaviour to be considered a Mebir it had to occur less than one minute after a greeting. For all but a few data samples eye contact with a dog was a prerequisite. Human eye contact with a dog communicates a friendly gesture (as inferred from my observation that dogs easily can be made to elicit a Mebir response from only gazing at them, and because a dog Mebir has been cited in the literature from a human gaze [13]). During data collection my eye contract with dogs did not invoke a threat response, which I have observed on rare occasions. The friendly greetings concomitantly given to invoke dog behavioural responses were eye contact, handwaves, and the high-toned, spoken word of “Hello”. I imagine that the following was essential for data collection, walking a dog along the sidewalk which lessened the possibility of them being distracted by their surroundings and not being interested in my greetings. Observing dogs in a natural setting gave dogs much to interact with, with the various kinds of Mebir responses they elicit. To gather data I employed use of a voice recorder.37
5. Conclusions
There are five lines of evidence from the natural sciences that improved sociality is of importance tosociety, other than from the evidence for the dog Mebir and the convincing evidence for the Mebir in humans and birds, including: 1) The inference that the Mebir is of decisive importance to society, in part from the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive (see Subsection 1.1.1). 2) The evidence for the social brain hypothesis (see Subsection 3.6, the section titled “the freedom to intellectualize theory”. 3) That the Mebir and sociality provide cultural and evolutionary freedom, see Subsection 3.6. 4) That improved sociality in the common chimpanzee, from reduced extra-reproductive sex, has provided them with evolutionary freedom cognitively (despite their more aggressive temperament), as reviewed in my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution. 5) That a friendship-favourable group composition of coastal populations of Atlantic common bottlenose dolphins and reduced conflict between conspecifics, (including when foraging) provided them with evolutionary freedom to evolve improvements in fitness (via sexual preferences), i.e., including a) for the Atlantic oceanic population, improved echolocation abilities and, b) the common bottlenose dolphin likely has an ability to reason.
Improved Sociality Was Likely of Importance in the Evolution of a Highly Evolved Echolocation System (as It Is Important to the Evolution of “an Ability to Reason”)
That improved sociality was likely of importance in the evolution of a highly evolved echolocation system of the Atlantic common bottlenose dolphin population is inferred from 1) The Atlantic population of common bottlenose dolphins having a more highly evolved echolocation system [47] a comparable ecology with the Pacific population, but have evolutionary freedom from improved sociability, i.e., from a friendship-favourable group composition, to evolve a highly evolved echolocation system as a function of sexual preferences. 2) Improved sociality is shown to be of importance to the evolution of an ability to reason, see Subsections 3.7 - 3.8, i.e., it is shown to evolve as a function of sexual preferences and improved sociality (from reduced conflict between conspecifics (e.g., from cooperative foraging, a reduction of intrusions of personal space when feeding, reduced stress levels from favourable food abundance, reductions in predatory impact and/or, from a friendship-favourable group composition), as per the freedom to intellectualize theory. 3) There is convincing evidence the common bottlenose dolphin evolved an ability to reason and has unique exceptional evolutionary freedom as listed in #2, (to evolve an ability to reason as a function of sexual preferences) and there is evidence that, 4) Higher intelligence can evolve as a function of improved sociality. For example, the common chimpanzee has more complex social behaviours, a larger encephalization quotient, and have cultural and evolutionary freedom from not engaging in extra-reproductive sex (this is in contrast with the common chimpanzee).
Evidence for Common Bottlenose Dolphin Culture (not Crucial to Survival)
Supporting evidence that improved sociability provided the common bottlenose dolphin with evolutionary freedom to evolve an ability to reason, and (for the Atlantic population) a better echolocation system, comes from the evidence for common bottlenose dolphin culture (not crucial to survival), which suggests that a displaced innate response and attraction to less stressed individuals and more interesting behaviours could have been a mechanism in the evolution of a highly evolved echolocation system (for the Atlantic population) and supporting evidence that sexual preferences was a mechanism of the evolution of “an ability to reason” for this delphinid. An ability to reason is shown to evolve as a function of a sexual preference (see Subsection 3.7, the section titled “how an ability to reason evolved in humans following the freedom to intellectualize theory”). Evidence for common bottlenose dolphin culture includes 1) Their song is seemingly improvised and used in social creativity, I hypothesize it is the most complex interactive song of animal species (for convincing evidence for their complex and interactive song,8 and the video I made [9] [10]). 2) The kinds of (three) close interspecies cetacean friendships they have (see Subsection 1.1.1, # (4), #4). 3) That one population engages in role-playing when hunting cooperatively, i.e., one driver dolphin herds fish towards a group of dolphins, trapping the fish to more easily be captured [48]. The Sarasota population of common bottlenose dolphins, (in Florida) have been studied for decades and this behaviour seen in Cedar Key, Florida has not been cited for Sarasota Bay nor for other common bottlenose dolphin populations, while Cedar Key is believed to have high fish abundances [49] [50], suggesting that their role playing is a learned behaviour that happens to improve foraging success, not crucial to survival. Furthermore, insomuch any dolphin can drive fish, from this ability not requiring any unique skill, inferred because schooling fish tend to herd together when frightened, as inferred, the individual which takes on the role of driving fish likely takes it on from the Mebir experience of giving, not from being better at performing this behaviour. The recipients likely prefer their role of receiving the gift (which the driver dolphin provides), from the receiver’s Mebir experiences of receiving a gift (socially). The two driver dolphins (TLFN and PNT) are not cited as being the largest dolphin in a group, suggesting that they may not have been the most adept dolphin at herding. 4) That a population of common bottlenose dolphins tends to form stronger repeated associations when socializing [51] (in contrast to when traveling and feeding), suggests they are forming close associations from the Mebir innate response, from friendly greetings, that occur when socializing. This interpretation of this dolphin association behavioural pattern (that it is a kind of common bottlenose dolphin culture (from likely not being crucial to survival)), best explains the evidence for this behaviour, which best fits the definition of a true friendship (whether or not this species has an ability to reason or not).
Supporting evidence that improved sociality was likely of importance to the evolution of more highly evolved echolocation system of the Atlantic oceanic population includes that their advanced ability to echolocate is likely, not crucial to survival, inferred from a comparable latitude distribution of both oceanic common bottlenose dolphin populations [52] and the Atlantic population, along the east coast of US likely having greater food abundances (not less, as Darwin’s concept of natural selection would predict), convincingly explaining the coastal Atlantic population’s tendency for a smaller home range (their more friendship-favourable group composition). The 1977 World Ocean Floor Marie Thorp map [53] suggests that the east coast of US has overall a larger continental shelf [53], suggesting greater fish abundances o in the Atlantic from more nutrient waters (from upwelling, more research is needed to prove this).
Possible Mechanisms of the Evolution of “a Higher Evolved Ability to Echolocate” in the Common Bottlenose Dolphin (as a Function of Sexual Preferences)
There is convincing evidence that the Atlantic oceanic population’s improved sociality gave them evolutionary freedom to evolve a more highly developed echolocation ability as a function of sexual preferences, i.e., from their paying attention to the physical and behavioural beneficial effects of a more highly developed echolocation system. In support of this hypothesis,delphinids have a more highly evolved echolocation system and a more friendship-favourable group composition than pinnipeds, suggesting that the more advanced echolocation system of dolphins is in part a safety characteristic (safety characteristics improve fitness but are not crucial to survival). Possibly, greater abundances of fish in the Atlantic seaboard (see #6 above), results in a more friendship-favourable common bottlenose dolphin group composition, that as inferred has provided them with a more highly evolved echolocation system. A less likely alternative hypothesis would be that a more highly evolved echolocation system of the Atlantic population evolved from improving fitness high enough. Two ways improved sociality of the Atlantic population (from a friendship-favourable group composition (and low conflict between conspecifics)) could have been a mechanism for the evolution of a better echolocation system (from improved attendance to the benefits of a highly evolved echolocation system, selected for via sexual preferences), in context with a more friendship-favourable group composition, include, that an improved echolocation system 1) Reduces stress from enhanced fitness or 2) More interesting (creative, playful and interactive) behaviours are manifested from enhanced fitness or reduced stress.
Further evidence from the natural sciences that improved sociality is of importance to society:
There is convincing evidence that the common bottlenose dolphin evolved an ability to reason (see 1.1.1, # (4)), and that they evolved it from improved sociality i.e., from a friendship-favourable group composition (of the coastal, Atlantic population), and reduced conflict between conspecifics. As a review, convincing evidence the common bottlenose dolphin evolved an ability to reason (from improved sociality) per the freedom to intellectualize theory, (this theory is described in Subsection 3.7, see the Section titled “how an ability to reason evolved in humans…”) comes from their ecology, i.e., from their unique, exceptional evolutionary freedom (including from improved sociality (i.e., from a friendship-favourable group composition and reduced conflict between conspecifics), their three kinds of interspecies close friendships, I suspect that they have the most complex interactive song of animal species8 (see the video I made [9] [10]) and the evidence their ability to reason would likely not be crucial to survival, as presented my forthcoming book on two new theories of evolution.
Inferences from the Mebir and the Common Bottlenose Dolphin’s “Ability to Reason”
In a video [9] [10] 1) I describe how the Mebir and two new theories of evolution are of importance to society, i.e., from heightening public awareness of the plight of the poor (in capitalist nations), and of the need to solve global (health, and safety) problems with a new kind of United Nations based upon gquic psychology, and 2) I describe how we ought care for the common bottlenose dolphin since they likely have “self-awareness” and a peaceful, loving, and non-aggressive composure (between conspecifics). Women are thought to be less selfish than men [54], which suggests they undergo the Mebir more frequently and are theretofore more effective in their work, i.e., in a non-competitive environment.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to Dr. Rose (my father) for his interest in my research, intended publications, and financial support, so I was able to formulate and find conclusive evidence for the two new theories of evolution, devote time to publishing this article on the Mebir, find proof for the theorem for humans being loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, and formulate more effective psychology and teaching-instructional methods. I am grateful to the Chinese government for helping me in 2012 to give a seminar on “The Theory of Evolutionary Freedom” to graduate students at the National Academy of Sciences Library in Beijing and for teaching positions at universities and colleges in five cities of China (PR), invaluable for formulating the freedom to intellectualize theory and the social-friendly, learning-instructional theory. I am also grateful to Deichmans bibliotek, Norway, the British Library, Britain, the natural history museum in Britain and the Netherlands, a Vietnamese professor, Dr. Anh who invited me to attend a botany class field trip to a south Vietnamese forest, which I attended, to Russian scientists and a Hungarian video editor, in Budapest, who introduced me to Adobe Audition software which Ly Fredrick (his pen name) used to study common bottlenose dolphin songs with spectral and frequency analysis, and to the editors of the Dutch journal “Animal Biology” for critiquing a document on evolution.
Kindly Be Aware
My research conforms to the Helsinki declaration of animal rights. My original data are available.
Disclaimer
The references, photographs and numbers used in this article 1) Do not promote any product or business and 2) Are not intended to promote capitalist propaganda, either directly, symbolically or with sarcasm.
NOTES
*BA in Natural Sciences.
1There is evidence for Vygotsky’s social development theory, his other theorems are not easily proven.
2The PISA aptitude test is administered to children of 15 years of age in 65 nations. It does not measure the memorisation of facts but rather students draw upon their knowledge and real-world problem-solving skills.
3With respect to the 2019 PISA aptitude test results [5], the following Asian nations with high PISA aptitude test scores had the positive influence of Taoism on a student’s ability to learn, China PR, Hong Kong (China PR), Japan, Macau (China PR), Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan (China PR), while four Asian nations with the highest PISA scores have a high level of political, social consciousness, including China PR, Hong Kong (China PR), Macau (China PR) and Japan. Four European nations with high PISA aptitude test scores have historically had a high level of political, social consciousness, including Finland, the Netherlands, Estonia, and Poland. Canada has high PISA aptitude test scores, and Canadians consider themselves progressive on social issues [6].
4Whether or not certain nations are aiming for high PISA aptitude scores, nations with the highest scores tend to have a high level of social consciousness (and for many, from a high level of political, social consciousness, see Footnote 3). In Asian nations, education is based on memorisation and exam-oriented learning. However, this does not explain the high scores on the PISA aptitude test in Finland in the early twenty-first century [7]. This fact suggests that cultural freedom is the critical factor that brought about the highest international scores on the PISA aptitude test, regardless of the presence or absence of an emphasis on memorisation and exams.
5For information about 1) “The Theory of (Cultural and) Evolutionary Freedom” (which shows evolution to be a function of species culture and evolutionary freedom, and disproves the concept of natural selection), and 2) “The Freedom to Intellectualize Theory” which shows the evolution of an ability to reason to be a function of evolutionary freedom, a friendship-favourable group composition, sexual preferences and reduced aggressive interaction, see my forthcoming book “Two New Theories of Evolution”, publisher Janus Publishing House, UK.
6That humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive ought to not be equated with the idealization of the joy of submission, but rather implies important revelations to society, including that there is a more effective learning-instructional theory, (the social-friendly, learning-instructional theory) see Subsection 1.2 and psychology (gquic psychology), see Subsections 1.1.1, and 1.2.2. that is critical for solving certain societal problems, see Subsection 1.2.1, #4.
7For the evidence the common bottlenose dolphin has a peaceful composure between conspecifics in my forthcoming book see the book on the zoology of the common bottlenose dolphin of Ly Fredrick, Janus Publishing house, UK.
8The common bottlenose dolphin’s song is complexly interactive from likely being improvised, tonal, rhythmic and consisting of many “notes” with seemingly a beginning middle and end section to a song. The solitary vireo songbird (Vireo solitarius) seems to sing a creative interactive song, personal observation. Jazz is complexly interactive, but I heard greater interactive complexity in the Vietnamese opera music in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
9This article provides evidence for primates and elephants not having an ability to reason. Thus nuptial gift giving [11] is likely not intentional, but rather a positive, non-conscious association of the joy of object manipulation with the joy of courtship. The male does not let go of an object which is increasingly desirable from an intensifying Mebir experience (as he approaches a female). (If the female likes the male) this sensual experience in the female releases the Mebir in her, bringing her to react in a more positive way. Gift giving in certain animals may be a learned behaviour. In humans gift-giving can be {1} an (intentional) reward, {2} a social experience, or/and {3} in communist and socialist nations an expression of love (that elicits the Mebir) (people are able to love in communist and socialist nations from communism and socialism not being an exploitive system of government).
10As I hypothesize, from a positive association, and increasing reinforcement that is the result of an enhanced Mebir experience from approaching another individual of the species.
11Individualised attention in education ought to be idealised, inferred from the evidence for the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, see Subsection 1.1.1. For individualised attention to be accessible to all students, good students can help poorer students learn.
12In accordance with Darwinian psychology, individualized attention ought not be valued, because only the fittest ought to be given special attention. In capitalist nations, when students are giving to others in their projects and presentations, insomuch capitalism is not in harmony with human nature from being an exploitive system of government, students will need to use the social friendly teaching method in their presentations, which nurtures social interactions (Mebir experiences) to make their presentations of interest to the class. An explanation for this deduction is available upon request. Many teachers and creative people prefer to use Darwinian psychology over gquic psychology and to use traditional teaching methods over the use of the social-friendly teaching method because capitalism causes self-initiated unkindness and because these provide a means of therapy to those who are punished for acts of kindness.
13In brief, gquic psychology is speedier than Darwinian psychology (if allowed), because it more objectively identifies the nature of a societal problem and the solution needed with objective science, an open debate and cited references devoid of commercial advertising and devoid of the influence of invested interests. In addition, there is evidence that gquic psychology is speedier from the evidence that the social friendly teaching method, and a high level of social consciousness (i.e., the Mebir) improves learning see 1.2.1, # (3), (5) and (6).
14This article provides evidence that a high level of social consciousness is of worth and beauty to society from the evidence for the existence of the Mebir, see Section 2, and the evidence for the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, reviewed in Subsection 1.1.1.
15Only one of these (two) psychologies can be used at the same instant-place for a given issue. Yet gquic psychology is more effective and speedier than Darwinian psychology (if allowed), see Subsection 1.2.2.
16The social-friendly teaching method can be used to make natural science classes more attractive and to improve student learning (and intellectualising), e.g., with use of topics of human interest (described in Subsection 1.2.1, see the section titled “topics of human interest in the natural sciences”), evenin capitalist nations (with creative works of human interest, see Subsection 1.2.3).
17Despite that some researchers have determined that repeating new vocabulary (i.e., drilling students) helps students learn a new language, further research is needed to determine if learning new vocabulary from reading interesting books and via creative writing is better suited for remembering new vocabulary over the long term.
18Any topic of human-interest ceases to be of human interest with commercial advertising. A topic of human interest that is of most relevance to the class being taught, as inferred, is of greater human interest.
19Non-secular spirituality is defined as “the ability to love and be loved”, precluded in capitalist nations from an exploitative system of government, not in harmony with human nature.
20With respect to the effect of an increase of dog whining and whimpering with gazing from the owner, if humans also have this response from a gaze, i.e., intellectually (and if humans have the veering off to the side response of dogs from a friendly greeting, see Footnote 29), this provides an additional evidence that a high level of social consciousness, gquic psychology, a new United Nations based on gquic psychology, and communist and socialist values are of importance, to minimize these kinds of problematic Mebir responses in humans.
21In the future, it may be possible to test this hypothesis.
22Convincing evidence for species culture gives the reader an understanding for why the Mebir was not previously discovered and that species culture and the Mebir are important to evolution, so that the scientific community will more readily accept my two new theories of evolution, and gquic psychology (based on the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive). Gquic psychology is crucial for solving societal problems dependent upon the masses gaining objective knowledge for a societal problem to be solved.
23For the first hypothesis, the expected ratio of dogs with a Mebir innate response of a more effective, unusual behaviour with an N of 50 was assigned the ratio of 1:50. The actual ratio was 48:50. For the second hypothesis, that a friendly gesture does not make dogs walk faster, or does not make them pull on the leash (when they do not perform any other Mebir innate response), the expected ratio of dogs with a Mebir innate response (of a faster walk) with an N of 29 was assigned the ratio of 1:29. The actual ratio was 27:29.
24The kind of courtesy bell I used to elicit a Mebir is available upon request.
25Social rewards positively affect the occurrence of desired behaviour [23].
26For the definition of animal culture see Section 1.3, the section titled “animal culture not crucial to survival”.
27Despite that people can find enjoyment in practicing self-initiated unkindness e.g., in a society without a high level of social consciousness, thisis detrimental to society, inferred from for the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, see Subsection 1.1.1 and the evidence for the Mebir, see Section 2. Instead, the following should be idealized: 1) Communist and socialist values with safeguards against corruption. 2) A comprehensive social-welfare system. 3) Gquic psychology. 4) Thesocial-friendly teaching method. 5) A new United Nations based on gquic psychology. 6) Humane worker’s unionsbased on gquic psychology.
28The idea of the worker having more varied working companions would be more feasible with the aid of an electronic device invention (that clamps on a wristwatch band) called a “helpful reminder”.
29Certain companies in capitalist nations are using computers to have workers at a company work with different working companions on many days of the week, which is a form of gquic psychology. This likely facilitates an increase in worker happiness and performance (personal observation from being an employee at such a company). However, any private company which does this activity ought not promote right wing, capitalist propaganda, because this gives the false impression that capitalism is in harmony with human nature, when it is not. A company in a capitalist nation that uses gquic psychology ought either promote social consciousness, leftist politics or be neutral about politics. It ought not promote right-wing politics, because they are then deceiving the people in suggesting that capitalism is in harmony with human nature, they are teaching their workers to be conforming, without question.
30A friendly greeting can bring dogs to have the response of a courageous “veering off down a side path or street or through an open door” (likely unfamiliar to the dog). If humans have this response of dogs, (i.e., intellectually), in competitive situations, this provides yet another line of evidence that high levels of social consciousness, gquic psychology, a new United Nations solely based on gquic psychology, and communist and socialist values (which are more in harmony with human nature) are of importance.
31For how gquic psychology is of importance to society see the video I made [9] [10] and Subsection 1.2.1 titled “solving societal problems with gquic psychology”.
32There is convincing evidence that the common bottlenose dolphin’s aggressive interactions against other smaller odontocetes is a function of their imperfect society rather than being a function of their having an aggressive temperament, see Subsection 1.1.1, # (4).
33I hypothesize that relieving boredom, culturally may be an important mechanism in the evolution of higher intelligence and, an ability to reason, as a function of sexual preferences.
34From the theorem that humans are loving, non-competitive and non-aggressive, see Subsection 1.1.1, humans, as inferred, prefer to not lie (to not bluff one another) (i.e., in a future, epitome society of a communist society).
35Though the encephalization quotient is for comparing the relative cognitive ability between animal species it may not be applicable for tax on which have exceptional and variable evolutionary freedom between species for example, for cetaceans and primates. With respect to cetaceans there is convincing evidence the common bottlenose dolphin has exceptional evolutionary freedom and “an ability to reason” (see 1.1.1, # (4) and the video I made [9] [10]) whereas the rough-toothed dolphin (Steno bredanesis) has a higher encephalization quotient [43], has restricted cultural freedom to evolve an ability to reason from their less friendship-favourable group composition, yet has evolutionary freedom despite that it is an open-ocean delphinid with a large home range [44] from having individual-group specificity [45] to evolve a distinctive species personality including: 1) synchronous behaviours and “tight” grouping; 2) much tactile contact; 3) cooperative play behaviour; 4) much curiosity [45]. I hypothesize their less friendship-favourable group composition restricted their evolutionary freedom to evolve an ability to reason (via sexual preferences) as a result of the members of a group not getting to know the more creative-compassionate personality of those individuals which happen inherit an ability to reason, yet their individual-group specificity gave them a greater affinity for animal culture. A more accurate measurement of relative intelligence may be to compare the size of the parts of the brain [41] and a species’ relative cultural and evolutionary freedom because exceptional cultural and evolutionary freedom can determine the complexity of a species’ culture and its’ cognitive complexity. The common chimpanzee has a cultural-favourable group (scission-coalescing) composition, greater evolutionary freedom from their kind of behavioural ecology (as explained in detail in my book on two new theories of evolution) and evolved a more complex personality and a larger brain, (yet the bonobo has greater evolutionary freedom to evolve an ability to reason from reduced conflict between conspecifics). Homo erectus likely evolved an ability to reason, inferred from their complex tools, artwork, use of fire, and greater encephalization. That at one location they had a tribe (likely not a clan) group composition [46], like the Atlantic common bottlenose dolphins and both species of chimpanzee, is in line with Homo erectus having evolved an ability to reason as a function of sexual preferences and reduced conflict.
36If the data were to not include hunting displaced innate responses, the results would remain the same.
37A hand-held voice recorder is invaluable for making an ethogram of dog innate responses to friendly greetings. A word processor was invaluable for formulating new theories, theorems, postulates, and a new psychology.