1
$\begingroup$

A dog has a great smell sense: while a human has about 5 million scent glands, a dog has between 125 to 200 million. The part that controls smell is also 40 times larger than in humans. A human can detect a spoon of sugar in a cup of coffee, but a dog can detect the same amount in a Olympic-size swimming pool!

The dog's sense of hearing is also significantly greater than a human’s. They can perceive frequencies twice that of a human. They distinguish sounds four times better than a human.

Now for the question: suppose an anthropomorphic dog species, which is basically capable of talking, moving, manipulating tools, aging and feeling emotions like humans, but with the senses of a dog.

I already thought that our buildings would have thicker walls and the markets would be like an amusement park for them. But what would be the biggest differences in our society if it was built by these species instead of humans (i.e., no humans or dogs evolved in our planet)?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Society is a big idea. You may want to limit this to one aspect, such as architecture as you brought up. $\endgroup$ – Kys Aug 2 '16 at 15:22
  • $\begingroup$ Is this a situation where all the dogs on Earth were suddenly anthropomorphic? Or where an Earth-like society had humans replaced with these dogs? Or something different than either of those? $\endgroup$ – Ranger Aug 2 '16 at 15:23
  • $\begingroup$ Also, are we assuming they can manipulate tools in a similar fashion to humans? $\endgroup$ – Kys Aug 2 '16 at 15:23
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Also keep in mind that dogs, even if they were very smart, would have significant challenges to forming a civilization - they can't use tools to nearly the same extent that we can. Some scientists believe that our ability to create complex sounds (fancy voice-box), coupled with our ability to manipulate complex tools and achieve fine detail challenged our ancestors to develop their brains in order to better use their own bodies. In other words our intelligence increased in order to match the potential that our bodies had. Dogs would be in the opposite situation. $\endgroup$ – AndreiROM Aug 2 '16 at 15:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Idk what question you previously asked, or how you framed it. Unfortunaly some users will answer a question whether it is within the site's scope or not, simply because they get a kick out of the concept - fair enough. But my opinion is that this question is still very broad, and I've expressed as much with my vote. What I'm trying to say is that two (hypothetical) wrongs, don't make a right. That you asked a broad question before and got answer doesn't mean that broad questions are OK, it means that some slip through the cracks (assuming the first one was broad). $\endgroup$ – AndreiROM Aug 2 '16 at 15:43
1
$\begingroup$

Art. With dogs having better sense of smell and slightly poorer eyesight, their main form of art might be depicted through aroma. EX: When decorating a Wedding cake they may focus more on what the frosting smells like than they would on how it looks. EX: Art galleries might consist of scented oils instead of paintings. (Maybe adding scented oils to a painting is a big part of painting) Smelling what the first dog president might be more interesting than seeing what they looked like.

Tools. Depending on how anthromorphic they are you might see tools develop differently. If they have screwdrivers they might be T-shaped instead of linear. This would allow them to more easily manipulate the screwdriver with their mouths. Tools, doorknobs and what not might have soft rubber coating to protect their teeth.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Crime. Specifically crime dramas on TV will last about 2 minutes instead of an hour! :-)

Member of the Public: Oh no! Mrs Miggins has been murdered!

Detective Inspector Bloodhound of the Yard: Yes, she has. And... [sniff, sniff, sniff]... the murderer is male, a non-smoker, and has recently eaten a bacon sandwich and drunk red wine. I've got his scent now, so I'll be able to pick him out of a line up in a jiffy.

Member of the Public: Oh, Inspector Bloodhound, you are a marvel.

Detective Inspector Bloodhound of the Yard: Nope. Just an ordinary sense of smell for a dog.

Literature. Any kind of reading and writing, really. Humans have phenomenal eyesight when it comes to detail. Marvel at the tiny dots above the i, crosses on the t and full stop at the end of this sentence. You can see all those, even in quite teeny font. So dogs will need bigger lettering in documents, street signs etc.

Dogs also can't see red, so their visual art and symbolism (like warning signs, traffic lights, etc) will be different.

More teachers required per mother. Dogs have litters of puppies not a single baby. Let's say they have six puppies at a time. If you want those puppies educated to the same level as you (i.e. same class size, same ratio of teachers to pupils) then you'll need a far higher proportion of teachers in your population. Humans = 1 teacher per 24 kids = 1 teacher per 24 women. Dogs with 1 teacher per 24 kids will need 1 teacher per 4 women.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.