Anonymous
It's more complicated than you think。
My friend and fellow dog lover Edie，an occupational therapist in Massachusetts，has been looking for a mate for nearly 10 years。She finally thought she'd found one in Jeff，a nice guy，generous and funny，who teaches high school。They dated for several months，and just as there was talk about a future，it occurred to Edie that Jeff hadn't really bonded with her yellow Lab，Sophie。In fact，as she thought more about it，she wasn't sure Jeff was a dog guy at all。
She confronted him about this at dinner one night，and he confessed，in some anguish，that he didn't love Sophie，didn't love dogs in general，never had。
They broke up the next week。More accurately，she dumped him。“What can I say？”Edie told me，somewhat defensively。“Sophie has been there for me，day in and day out，for years。I can't say the same of men。She's my girl，my baby。Sooner or later，it would have ended。”
Having just spent two months on a book tour talking to dog lovers across the country，I can testify that this story isn't unusual。The lesson Edie gleaned，she says，was that she should have asked about Sophie first，not last。
In America，we love our dogs。A lot。So much that we rarely wonder why anymore。
This，perhaps，is why God created academics。
John Archer，a psychologist at the University of Central Lancashire，has been puzzling for some time over why people love their pets。In evolutionary terms，love for dogs and other pets“poses a problem。”he writes。Being attached to animals is not，strictly speaking，necessary for human health and welfare。True，studies show that people with pets live a bit longer and have better blood pressure than benighted nonowners，but in the literal sense，we don't really need all those dogs and cats to survive。
Archer's alternative Darwinian theory：Pets manipulate the same instincts and responses that have evolved to facilitate human relationships，“primarily（but not exclusively）those between parent and child。”
No wonder Edie ditched Jeff。She was about to marry the evil stepfather，somebody who wasn't crazy about her true child。
Or，to look at it from the opposite direction，Archer suggests：“consider the possibility that pets are，in evolutionary terms，manipulating human responses，that they are the equivalent of social parasites。”Social parasites inject themselves into the social systems of other species and thrive there。Dogs are masters at that。They show a range of emotions-love，anxiety，curiosity-and thus trick us into thinking they possess the full range of human feelings。
They dance with joy when we come home，put their heads on our knees and stare longingly into our eyes。Ah，we think，at last，the love and loyalty we so richly deserve and so rarely receive。Over thousands of years of living with humans，dogs have become wily and transfixing sidekicks with the particularly appealing characteristic of being unable to speak。We are therefore free to fill in the blanks with what we need to hear。（What the dog may really be telling us，much of the time，is：“Feed me。”）
As Archer dryly puts it，“Continuing features of the interaction with the pet prove satisfying for the owner。”
It's a good deal for the pets，too，since we respond by spending lavishly on organic treats and high quality health care。
Psychologist Brian Hare of Harvard has also studied the human animal bond and reports that dogs are astonishingly skilled at reading humans'patterns of social behavior，especially behaviors related to food and care。They figure out our moods and what makes us happy，what moves us。Then they act accordingly，and we tell ourselves that they're crazy about us。
“It appears that dogs have evolved specialized skills for reading human social and communicative behavior。”Hare concludes，which is why dogs live so much better than moles。
These are interesting theories。Raccoons and squirrels don't show recognizable human emotions，nor do they trigger our nurturing（“She's my baby”）impulses。So，they don't（usually）move into our houses，get their photos taken with Santa，or even get names。Thousands of rescue workers aren't standing by to move them lovingly from one home to another。
If the dog's love is just an evolutionary trick，does that diminish it？I don't think so。Dogs have figured out how to insinuate themselves into human society in ways that benefit us both。We get affection and attention。They get the same，plus food，shelter，and protection。To grasp this exchange doesn't trivialize our love，it explains it。
I'm enveloped by dog love，myself。Izzy，a border collie who spent the first four years of his life running along a small square of fencing on a nearby farm，is lying under my desk at the moment，his head resting on my boot。
Rose，my working dog，is curled into a tight ball in the crate to my left。Emma，the newcomer who spent six years inside the same fence as Izzy，prefers the newly re upholstered antique chair。Plagued with health problems，she likes to be near the wood stove in the winter。
When I stir to make tea，answer the door，or stretch my legs，all three dogs move with me。I see them peering out from behind the kitchen table or pantry door，awaiting instructions，as border collies do。If I return to the computer，they resume their previous positions，with stealth and agility。If I analyzed it coldly，I would admit that they're probably alert to see if an outdoor romp is in the offing，or some sheepherding，or some beef jerky。But I'd rather think they can't bear to let me out of their sight。
这个问题比你想象的要复杂得多。
我的朋友伊迪，是马萨诸塞州的职业治疗师，和我一样都非常爱狗。她一直在寻找她的那一半，已经寻找了将近10年。终于，她觉得她找到了。男朋友是一个名叫杰夫的高中老师，帅气、大方而且有趣。几个月的时间里，两个人不断地约会。然而，就在两个人要谈婚论嫁的时候，伊迪突然感到杰夫不是那么喜欢苏菲；杰夫和苏菲没有那么亲密（苏菲是她养的黄色的拉布拉多犬）。实际上，她越是认真回想，越是感觉杰夫根本不是个喜欢狗的人。
一天晚上，两个人一起吃晚饭。伊迪当面问杰夫这个问题，杰夫说出了心里话，样子非常痛苦。他说他不爱苏菲，也根本不爱狗，从来都不。
第二个星期他们就分手了。更确切地说，是伊迪把杰夫甩了。“我能说什么呢？”伊迪告诉我说，有点自我辩解的意思。“这么多年了，苏菲守候着我，陪伴着我，日日如此，年年如此。可是，我可不敢保证男人也会这样做。苏菲是我的女儿，我的宝贝。我和杰夫早晚会分手。”
我刚刚花了两个月的时间，巡回促销我的新书，并向全国的爱狗人士做演讲，和他们交流。因此可以证明，上面这个故事很普通。伊迪说，她从中得到了教训，就是她应该先问问苏菲的意见，而不是最后才去考虑苏菲的感受。
在美国，人们爱狗非常喜欢。我们太爱狗，爱到什么都不再问。
也许，这就是上帝创造专业学者的原因。
中兰开夏郡大学的心理学家约翰·阿彻，有一阵曾经疑惑不解，人为什么会喜欢自己养的宠物。从进化论的角度讲，人对狗、对其他宠物的爱“成了一个问题”他这样写道。严格地说，人人渴望拥有健康和幸福，但却没有必要靠依恋动物获得健康、拥有幸福。研究表明，家里养有宠物的人寿命更长一些，血压情况也比那些傻傻的、没有养宠物的人好得多。这是真的。但是，严格说来，我们实际上不需要依靠狗狗和猫猫们才能活下来。
阿彻的达尔文理论新说：宠物巧妙地掌握和控制着和人一样的本能和反应。这些本能和反应经过进化，可以调整人与人的关系，“主要是（但不仅仅是）父母和孩子之间的关系。”
怪不得伊迪会抛弃杰夫。因为她即将嫁给这样一个坏继父，一个不喜欢她的亲生孩子的人。
要么，我们反过来看这个问题。阿彻建议：“考虑到宠物操控（从进化论的角度）、掌握着人的反应的这种可能性，那么他们就等于是社会寄生虫。”社会寄生虫总是把自己吸附于其他物种的社会系统中，并依赖这些物种发展、壮大自己。狗善于这样做。他们表现出很多情感——爱、焦虑、好奇——因此使人相信，他们有着和人一样的所有情感。
我们回家的时候，他们高兴地跳着、叫着，还把头放在我们膝盖上，并且充满渴望地盯着我们的眼睛。哈！还有爱和忠诚。我们总是觉得，自己绝对值得别人付出爱、付出忠诚，可是我们寻寻觅觅，却很难得到。最终，在狗这里我们得到了爱，得到了忠诚。和人类一起生活了成千上万年，狗已经成竹在胸，“老谋深算”，懂得怎么样才能成为人类永远的密友。狗不会说话，恰恰能够借此打动人的心扉，成了格外具有吸引力的特征。这样我们可以发挥想象，任意填补这个空缺。想听什么，就觉得狗说的正是同样的话。（大多数情况下，也许狗真正在说的是：“喂我吃东西吧。”）
正像阿彻说的那样：“人和宠物之间这种持续的情感互动，会让主人非常满意。”这种说法不加任何渲染，道出了事实。
我们的宠物也非常高兴。原因是我们给宠物买来有机零食，给宠物购买高质量的医保，出手十分大方，来回报宠物。
哈佛大学的心理学家布莱恩也研究过人与动物的这种亲密关系。研究结果说狗善于洞察人类社会行为的模式、规律，尤其是与食物和关心相关的行为。狗的这种能力让人吃惊。他们懂得我们的情绪，还知道什么会让我们高兴，什么能感动我们的心灵。那么他们会酌情对待，根据不同的情况采取不同的表现，从而使我们觉得狗非常喜欢我们。
“好像狗已经形成了专门的能力，理解人类的社会及交往行为。”这是哈尔的结论。正是由于这一点，狗才比鼹鼠的日子好得多。
这些都是非常有趣的理论。浣熊和松鼠没有明显的人类的情感，也不会引发我们产生养育他们的冲动（她是我的孩子）。因此，（通常情况下）我们不会把他们带到家里养着，也不会让他们和圣诞老人一起拍照，甚至也不会给他们起名字。成千上万的救援人员不会随时待命，充满爱意地把他们从一个避难所转到另一个避难所。
如果狗的爱仅仅是进化出来的技巧，这种技巧让爱贬值了吗？我不这样认为。狗已经知道怎样就可以慢慢地、巧妙地融入人类社会，所使用的这些方式能让狗和人双双获益。我们得到爱，得到关注；他们同样得到爱和关注，还有食物、住处和保护。进行这样的交换不会使我们的爱贬值，恰恰说明了爱的价值。
我被狗的爱包围着，我自己。依奇是一只边境牧羊犬。四岁之前，他在附近的农场上生活，每天沿着一圈篱笆墙跑来跑去。此刻，他就躺在我的书桌下面，头枕在我穿着靴子的脚上。
罗斯是我的工作犬。她把身子蜷曲成一个球，躲在我左边的大柳条箱里。爱玛是新来的狗。六岁之前，她在和依奇一样的篱笆墙里生活。爱玛特别喜欢这个古老的椅子，最近我刚给椅子重新装过坐垫。爱玛身体不好，冬天的时候，她喜欢呆在离炉子很近的地方。
当我起身去沏茶的时候，当我去开门的时候，当我舒展自己双腿的时候，所有三只狗都和我一起动。我看见他们注视着我，等候着我的指示，不管他们是在厨房餐桌下面，还是在食品储藏室的门后，都是这样。边境牧羊犬往往如此。如果我又回到电脑跟前，他们就马上恢复原来的姿势，像先前那样呆着，带着狡猾，带着机敏。如果冷静地分析一下，我会承认，他们马上警觉起来，也许只是想看看可不可以去外面玩游戏，或者有什么伙伴来访，或者是否有牛肉丁可以吃。但是，我宁愿相信，他们不愿意我离开他们的视线，只想和我呆在一起。
鹦鹉学舌
University of Central Lancashire中兰开夏郡大学
中兰开夏郡大学是一所公立大学，主校区位于普雷斯顿市中心。这所大学的历史可追溯到1828年因戒酒运动而建立的知识传播学院。1887年学院与EH。哈里斯的遗产哈里斯学会和哈里斯学院合并，这使学院得以壮大起来并于1973年发展为普雷斯顿工艺学院（它是撒切尔夫人就任教育部长期间建立的最后一个工艺学院）。考虑到要让该工艺学院不仅仅为普林斯顿，而且为整个兰开夏郡服务，学院于1984年改名为兰开夏郡工艺学院，并于1992年获得了大学地位，命名为中兰开夏郡大学。这所大学被英国皇家质量检测局认定为最好的综合性大学之一。
牛角挂书
New Words
therapist n。治疗专家[亦作therapeutist]
anguish n。1.（身体上的）剧痛2.（精神上的）极度痛苦；悲痛；苦恼
vt。使（感到）极度痛苦，使悲痛；使苦恼vi。感到极度痛苦，悲痛；苦恼：
benighted adj。无知的，愚昧的；不明是非的
wily adj。狡猾的；狡诈的；诡计多端的
sidekick n。[俚]共犯；朋友
pantry n。餐具室；食品室；食品储藏室
agility n。敏捷；灵活；机敏
sheepherding n。牧羊adj。牧羊的
upholster vt。1.为（家具等）装上套、垫等2.为（房间）装设地毯、帘幕等
romp n。好玩的游戏，欢闹，嬉戏v。嬉闹玩耍vi。嬉闹玩笑
T
猴老师有话说
est Yourself
Multiple Choice Questions
1.More accurately，she dumped him。
A。丢弃，抛弃B。猛地扔下，使砰地落下
C。把……倒空D。倒掉
2.This，perhaps，is why God created academics。
A。普通文化课B。大学教师
C。学术活动D。学术知识；专业学者
3.The lesson Edie gleaned，……was that she should have asked……not last。
A。收集（资料）B。拾落穗
C。查清，查明D。找出；得到
4.No wonder Edie ditched Jeff
A。躲避，躲开B。旷课，缺席
C。摆脱；抛弃D。在……周围挖沟
5.Dogs have figured out how to insinuate themselves into human society in ways that benefit us both。
A。悄悄地进入B。暗示
C。使逐渐产生D。使缓慢行进
6.Thousands of rescue workers aren't standing by to move them lovingly from one home to another。
A。在……的旁边B。袖手旁观
C。处于待命状态D。支持（某人）
7.Thousands of……standing by to move them lovingly from one home to another。
A。家，家庭B。住所，住宅
C。避难所D。栖息地
8.If I return to the computer，they resume their previous positions……
A。重新获得B。恢复，重返
C。（中断后）又继续D。取回，收回
Keys：
1.A2.D3.D4.C5.A6.C7.C8.C
T
猩猩出手
ranslation
1.True，studies show that people with pets live a bit longer and have better blood pressure than benighted nonowners，but in the literal sense，we don't really need all those dogs and cats to survive。
2.Pets manipulate the same instincts and responses that have evolved to facilitate human relationships，“primarily（but not exclusively）those between parent and child。”
3.Or，to look at it from the opposite direction，Archer suggests，“consider the possibility that pets are，in evolutionary terms，manipulating human responses，that they are the equivalent of social parasites。”
4.Over thousands of years of living with humans，dogs have become wily and transfixing sidekicks with the particularly appealing characteristic of being unable to speak。
5.As Archer dryly puts it，“Continuing features of the interaction with the pet prove satisfying for the owner。”
Keys：
1.研究表明，拥有宠物的人寿命更长一些，血压情况也比那些傻傻的、没有养宠物的人好得多。这是真的。
2.宠物巧妙地掌握和控制着同样的本能和反应。这些本能和反应经过进化，可以调整人与人的关系，“主要是（但不仅仅是）父母和孩子之间的关系。”
3.要么，我们反过来看这个问题。阿彻建议：“考虑到宠物操控（从进化论的角度）、掌握着人的反应的这种可能性，那么他们就等于是社会寄生虫。”
4.和人类一起生活了成千上万年，狗已经成竹在胸，“老谋深算”，懂得怎么样才能成为人类永远的密友。
5.正像阿彻说的那样：“人和宠物之间这种持续的情感互动，会让主人非常满意。”这种说法不加任何渲染，道出了事实。