Morning,

morning everybody.

Stephen Mullen you from Free Domain.

Hey, pinch, first day of the month.

It is the first of September, not the month that you wake me up, but it ends.

But we have one question and some

old questions I actually found them so I don't think I've answered them before and I wanted to make sure that I at least got around to answering them once if not twice.

Somebody writes, if Lave is our involuntary response to virtue in protecting slash defending is considered virtuous

would that mean that we can love our pets and they can love us if we're of great moral

character. I believe, not proof, that animals understand our intentions, behaviors to feel safe

of this and we will feel safe when they fiercely defend us.

No.

So if protecting and defending is considered virtuous, then we must fall in rapid passionate love, romantic love perhaps, with our own immune system or a brick wall or a roof or other things that shelter us. We then must love our airbags and marry them after

they deploy in a car accident. No, protecting defending is not virtuous. Animals are following pre-programmed patterns without reference to higher moral ideals.

I don't get me wrong. I love animals. I really do. And I love pets. I grew up with hamsters and mice and the relatives of mine in Ireland had a wonderful caucus

banyle named Brandy.

I could never understand why she had no tail.

But, and I remember when I was in Africa

as a teenager, there were dogs so keen on having their hair brushed that back when I would pick up a brush to brush my hair as a teenager they would jump on me because they thought I would brush them.

Absolutely delightful creatures, but the dogs are instinctual animals.

They have no language skills, of course.

They cannot compare proposed actions to ideal standards.

...