Baboon Metaphysics is one book I think I'll never read. Those are two of my least favorite subjects, ever.

yawn.

don't forget that dogs (originally wolves) were excellent hunting companions for early man.

also, it is human nature (I would say animal, but, like humans, it's not always the case...) to nurture what we find cute or perceive as weaker and to develop dependence relationships with those creatures.

there are some interesting theories about coevolution (vs. domestication):
http://www.uwsp.edu/psych/s/275/Science/…

most breeds have very specific jobs attached to them as well.

Interesting post. The latest thinking on the domestication of wolves, ca. 10,000 years ago in around what is now Manchuria, is that wolves domesticated themselves. By living on the perimeter of human society, those dogs that could tolerate humans had access to food scraps, and perhaps some protection in that other predators tend to stay clear of humans, and selecting for human-tolerant traits over time resulted in a symbiotic relationship where wolves/dogs and humans cooperated on security and hunting. The dog does not merely serve the human, but the human also serves the dog because the two species have complementary but different strengths. Since both human and canine societies are social and hierarchical, as #3 points out, humans and dogs are unusually well-adapted to life together.

Puppy!

What do you mean...an animal that's not consumed?

In Korea, we frequently enjoy shish-ka-bow-wow!

Baboons and metaphysics are two of my favorite subjects.

Think about the benefits plasticity of compassion has given humanity. Dogs and cats are accidentally benefiting from the adaptations that allows us to help strangers and care for other people's babies or hunt in cooperation with a sexual rival.

6 is right. Natural selection benefited some wolves who had the genes for "not running away from humans." That's it really. Phrases like "an overflow of human sociality" doesn't translate into evolutionary or biological mechanisms.

You know there is this ongoing experiment with foxes, right? Scientists in England are attempting to repeat the dog's heritage with foxes. With each generation they pick the foxes who let humans approach and pet them without freaking out. In just a few generations they got docile housecat-like behaviors in their baby foxes. After a few more generations they got animals that were very affectionate and dog-like. So those approach/avoid genes are there just waiting for evolution to need them for new circumstances.

I read the book. It is very astute and descriptive. Beautiful to read actually. It's just that the behaviors you refer to have another explanation.

Previous comments miss the point. Yes, evolution created wolves that could tolerate humans, but it did not create humans that could tolerate dogs. Take any child from, say, the canineless tobriand islanders, raise her in a dog loving culture, and she will be as likely to love a dog as you or I. The same is not true of a wolf cub. Charles hypothesis addresses this strange human plasticity, not the wolf's genetic determinism. You all should add some cognitive anthro to your evolutionary psychology readings.