You don't know enough about animals to make a convincing argument, but you feel comfortable enough in your knowledge of both animals and neuroscience to say tha

You don't know enough about animals to make a convincing argument, but you feel comfortable enough in your knowledge of both animals and neuroscience to say that they are neurologically incapable of being ferocious, loving or independent? That doesn't make a lot of sense. I think you may be a little bit blinded by your biases here — it sounds more like anthropocentrism than reason.