> I feel that for this to be a surprising revaluation to someone seems to me to indicate a lingering of the archaic notion that god created man in his image, an

> I feel that for this to be a surprising revaluation to someone seems to me to indicate a lingering of the archaic notion that god created man in his image, and therefore man was different from beast. I think a more interesting take on the article is that dogs do NOT process woofs like we, and they, process human language. It seems to suggest that there is a qualitative difference between speaking and barking, and also (as stated in the article) that dogs picked up a new set of language skills only by listening to us, which is super cool and in a way the most dog-like thing possible. In that sense I'd say that human and beast are proven different by the experiment.