In this episode of Dogs in Our World, host Adam Winston explores the intersection of philosophy and canine companionship with Dr. Steven Hales, professor of philosophy at Bloomsburg University and editor of What Philosophy Can Tell You About Your Dog. Together, they unpack how dogs can illuminate timeless philosophical questions—from ethics and epistemology to metaphysics and the philosophy of mind.
Can dogs truly be our friends, or is it a different kind of bond? Do they feel guilt, or have they simply evolved behaviors that mimic human emotion? Are dog breeds real categories, or just convenient labels? Through personal stories and deep inquiry, Dr. Hales helps us rethink what it means to live alongside dogs—and what they might teach us about ourselves.
Whether you’re new to philosophy or curious about the minds of animals, this episode offers a fresh, accessible lens on how dogs help us grapple with life’s biggest questions.

Read on for key takeaways, resource links, and the full transcript.

S1 E03: Dogs and Philosophy

Adam: Dogs help me grasp difficult subjects. They also give me the confidence that I need to conquer challenges. The only way I have been able to confidently approach the world of philosophy, and maybe understand some of it, is by looking to domestic dogs as examples.

Adam: Since this show is about meeting experts and getting answers from the source, I searched the Internet for someone who could teach us about dogs and philosophy. With the help of my old philosophy professor in Philadelphia, I found this guy …

Adam: Dr. Steven Hales is a professor of philosophy at Bloomsburg University in Pennsylvania. He edited a collection called What Philosophy Can Tell You About Your Dog, published by Open Court.

Adam: Dr. Hales believes philosophy has something to say about many areas people are interested in, even if they don’t realize it. Whether it’s dogs, cats, or drinking beer, philosophy can illuminate aspects of everyday life and bring ideas out of the ivory tower.

Adam: With Dr. Hales’ help, we’re bringing a bit of Philosophy 101 to the world of dogs. If you’ve never taken a philosophy class or want to revisit the subject with a fresh approach, let’s see how dogs can help teach us something new.

Adam: Our experiences with dogs as pets and companions offer an avenue to reflect on philosophical issues. For example, can dogs genuinely be our friends, or is it a different kind of relationship? Do we have special obligations to our own dogs that we don’t have to others? Do dogs truly feel affection, or have they evolved to imitate behaviors that help them live well with humans?

Adam: Dr. Hales made me think a lot about dogs and philosophy. It’s been difficult to share everything he taught me in just one episode. As usual, I like to start at the beginning.

Adam: When many people think about philosophy, they think of classic philosophers like Plato and Confucius. I asked Dr. Hales if any of those early thinkers ever mentioned dogs.

Steven: There was some ancient discussion about whether dogs could reason logically. Not so much about dog minds or ethics, but whether they could use logical reasoning. For example, if a dog is chasing a rabbit and the trail splits, does the dog reason that the rabbit isn’t down one path and therefore must be down the other?

Adam: Rene Descartes, a 17th-century French scientist, mathematician, and philosopher, is often referred to as the father of Western philosophy. He viewed animals as automata—automatic beings like machines. This view, known as the Cartesian view, has influenced how animals are treated industrially today.

Adam: Philosophers have long wondered what separates living things from non-living things. In Descartes’ time, mechanical devices could mimic living functions, raising questions about how to understand non-human animals. Do dogs have minds like us, or are they biological machines without mentality?

Adam: Descartes believed animals were like clocks. But modern philosophers, especially post-Darwin, see humans, dogs, and other animals as part of a continuum rather than fundamentally distinct kinds.

Adam: In ancient times, animals were often seen as workers or prey. Egyptians tied animals into worship, like Bastet the cat or Anubis the jackal-headed god. But modern philosophers think differently about relationships with non-human animals.

Adam: Dr. Hales also introduced us to several branches of philosophy that can be used to examine dogs:

Adam: We also explored whether dogs have a sense of self. Do they recognize their own identity or see themselves as part of a pack? Can they reflect on their own thoughts?

Adam: This ties into questions about guilt and shame. Do dogs feel guilty, or have they learned to show behaviors we interpret as guilt? Are we anthropomorphizing—attributing human traits to dogs?

Adam: Dr. Hales shared personal examples, like his dog Sophie sneaking onto the bed. Was she being naughty, or just playing a game? Can we blame dogs for their actions, or are they simply acting within their understanding?

Adam: These philosophical questions don’t have easy answers, but they help us think more deeply about our relationships with dogs.

Adam: Coming up, we’ll explore more practical ideas and personal examples to reflect on when looking at dogs.

Adam: Welcome back. In this part of the episode, we’re diving deeper into how dogs experience emotions and what that means for how we treat them.

Adam: Dr. Hales, do you think dogs feel love the same way humans do?

Steven: That’s a tough one. Dogs certainly show affection, but whether it’s the same as human love is debatable. They may not have the same conceptual framework, but they do form strong emotional bonds.

Adam: I’ve seen dogs grieve when their owners pass away. That seems like a deep emotional response.

Steven: Absolutely. There are documented cases of dogs mourning. But again, we have to be careful not to project human emotions onto them.

Adam: So how do we ethically respond to those emotions? If dogs feel grief or love, does that mean we owe them more than just food and shelter?

Steven: That’s where the ethics of care comes in. It’s a philosophical approach that emphasizes relationships and emotional responsiveness. If we accept that dogs have emotional lives, then our moral obligations expand.

Adam: That makes sense. It’s not just about keeping them alive—it’s about helping them thrive.

Steven: Exactly. And that includes respecting their preferences, giving them agency, and recognizing their individuality.

Adam: I love that. It’s a shift from ownership to partnership.

Steven: Well said.

Adam: We’ll continue this conversation in Part 3, where we explore how dogs help us reflect on our own humanity.

Adam: Welcome back to the final part of this episode. We’ve talked about how dogs help us understand philosophy and ethics. Now, let’s turn the lens around—how do dogs help us understand ourselves?

Adam: Dr. Hales, do you think dogs reflect human nature in some way?

Steven: Absolutely. Dogs are deeply social creatures, and their behavior often mirrors our own. They respond to kindness, fear, routine, and even social hierarchies.

Adam: I’ve noticed that when I’m anxious, my dog seems anxious too. It’s like they pick up on our emotional states.

Steven: That’s a great observation. Dogs are incredibly attuned to human emotions. They’ve evolved alongside us, and that co-evolution has shaped their ability to read and respond to our cues.

Adam: So in a way, they’re emotional mirrors.

Steven: Exactly. And that reflection can be powerful. It forces us to confront our own behaviors, moods, and even moral choices.

Adam: That’s profound. It’s like dogs help us become better people just by being present.

Steven: Yes, and that’s why the relationship is so special. It’s not just companionship—it’s a kind of moral and emotional feedback loop.

Adam: I’ve learned patience, empathy, and even forgiveness from my dog.

Steven: And those are deeply philosophical virtues. Dogs don’t just teach us about themselves—they teach us about ourselves.

Adam: That’s a beautiful way to end this episode. Thank you, Dr. Hales, for helping us explore the philosophical dimensions of our relationships with dogs.

Steven: My pleasure. It’s been a joy.

Adam: Until next time, keep reflecting, keep learning, and give your dog a little extra love today.

If you enjoyed this episode:

In Episode 02, Adam Winston sits down with historian Mark Derr to trace the journey of dogs in North America—from their arrival with Indigenous peoples as pack animals and spiritual companions, through colonial conquests and presidential preferences, to their service and suffering in global conflicts. We explore unique native breeds like the Salish Wool Dog, the foxhounds of Washington versus the herders of Jefferson, and the ethical complexities of war dogs in WWII, the Iraq War, and modern society.

Read on for key takeaways, resource links, and the full transcript.

MARK DERR: DOGS AND HISTORY
This will be another three-part episode. First, we’re going to learn about how dogs arrived to North America, their role in colonial history, and then forward in time to the 20th and 21st century. I posted lots of research links to the show notes at dogsinourworld.com.

Part 1
Mark: The main thing about history is that we learn it, so that we try to avoid re-peating it. By repeat it, I mean that we repeat the themes of history more than the actions of the people who formed them.

Mark was just describing the theme of today’s show. This guy blows my mind every time I have the privilege of learning from him. You may have seen Mark on PBS, A&E, and the Discovery Channel. You can also read his stuff in the New York Times, Atlantic Monthly, and Smithsonian Magazine among many others. To me, he’s like the Gandalf of dog experts. If mother nature was actually a wise and no-nonsense dude in Miami Beach—she would be Mark Derr.

Mark: I’m interested in the human connection to the natural and built world. Dogs I’m into, because they are a mediator between us. Dogs are interesting, because of their ubiquity in the world. They’re useful as companions and workers. If that makes sense to anyone…good. If not, you need a dog.

In the first episode, we talked about the history of wolves and their transformation into dogs. In today’s show, we’re going to primarily focus on the history of dogs in North America. Then, onto the New World and through present day.

In order to set the stage and give us a starting point, I asked Mark to explain how we first got dogs in North America.

Mark: It’s long been assumed they came across the bearing straight. After the ice melt. Whether that’s true, I don’t know. That may change with genetic evidence, but I think they would have come with the first people.

Adam: And what kind of dogs were these?

Mark: They were probably wolf-like dogs as most were at the time. They became more wolf-like as they proceeded down the continent, I assume. Because, people lose them and need to replenish them. So, they bred with wolves for some time after the dog came into existence. We might call them dog-wolves, or dog-like, whichever.

Native Americans were the first people to begin using dogs in North America. I have often said that dogs make me feel closer to both God and mother nature. That hard-to-define spiritual bond with a companion dog was also likely felt by some of the earliest peoples in America.

Derr: It depends from culture to culture. We know from burials that they had an important place in society [and with] important people. [Dogs were] assumed to serve as guides to the land of the dead. Sometimes, dogs were sacrificed or died at the same time [as their owners]. [In order to] help them navigate to the new kingdom.

The first dogs in North America also served as hunting dogs. Little dogs were used to bay, or control the movement of elk. Larger dogs helped native Americans hunt bear and wildcats. They were even used to hunt otters and other aquatic prey. There was the Salish Wool dog here in what is now the Pacific Northwest. These dogs were bred in isolation on an island by the Coast Salish Peoples. The dogs’ coats were made into fabric and clothing and they were bred on the island in order to preserve the Salish Wool Dog bloodline. Is it possible that the Salish Peoples were the first dog groomers? Here’s Mark, again—

Mark: It was their role in carrying packs that allowed them to go into the New World with people. I think that one can’t deny that. You can travel much further and faster with dogs than with your own two feet. When they came into being they were used pretty much as they are now. That is, they were used to drag along their own packs and people. Lash two poles and you can carry a lot of things.

If only things could stay this harmonious and lovely. Unfortunately, if you remember from our recent interview with Erik from Wolf Haven—soon the Europeans arrive.

Part 2
In Part 1, Mark Derr explained how dogs first arrived to the North American continent and were soon used by some early Native American cultures. He claimed it was the dogs’ ability to serve as a pack animal—by “pack animal” I mean they carried stuff—that allowed them to enter the New World with humans.

Now, I want to begin Part Two by talking about the dogs who ‘probably came with Columbus. Dogs were ubiquitous on these voyages. They had a number of types of dogs in Spain—herding and livestock. Their primary function for the Spaniards was to terrorize and brutalize and kill the Native Americans to great aplomb. Since there aren’t many natives left where the Spaniards were, it’s a very sad part of American history that dogs were used in that way. But what it did do was keep dogs from being militarized for a long period of time—basically, until WWII.

Adam: What do you mean by that?
Mark: The Spanish use of dogs to brutalize people was so offensive to many colonists in New England—who otherwise weren’t offended by much—that they would not use dogs for that purpose. In fact, the one time dogs were enlisted was during the Seminole Indian Wars of the 19th century, when Congress mandated that some Cuban bloodhounds be brought to Florida to hunt Indians. One of the chief opponents of this was John Quincy Adams’s son—whose dad became president.

The U.S. presidents before and after John Adams also greatly valued their collection of dogs. Here’s what Mark says about the different purposes Washington and Jefferson had for their dogs.

Mark: Well, Washington was a major lover of dogs and breeder of foxhounds, because fox hunting was his passion. He kept close tabs on his dogs. Sometimes he’d loan them out to people. He had some little dogs, but foxhounds were his main thing.

At one point he wrote to Ireland—he used his extensive contacts to not only request dogs, but also play politics. He requested wolfhounds, because he wanted them on his plantations. This was right at the end of the 18th century. He was told that there were no more wolfhounds in Ireland, since the wolves had been extirpated from the British Isles about 50–100 years earlier. So his correspondent offered him a well-bred mastiff as a guard dog instead of a wolfhound. Of course, that wasn’t very acceptable to Washington.

Thomas Jefferson, on the other hand, was into herding dogs. He brought some back from France with him.

I find it fascinating that George Washington was more into dogs who could hunt fox and kill wolves, while Thomas Jefferson was into herding dogs. Dare I say, a more peaceful purpose for a dog. I don’t know. I go back to thinking about how often dogs can be a reflection of their owner.

If you’re interested in learning more about these presidents and their relationship with dogs, I highly recommend you check out Mark Derr’s book A Dog’s History of America. I’m currently in the middle of it and can’t wait to finish. Then I’m moving on to his other books before I read anything else. I have links to some of his books and articles in the show notes at dogsinourworld.com.

Coming up, in the final part of the show, Mark is going to fly the time machine forward and remind us of some historical events in the 20th and 21st century that have affected the dogs in our world.

Part 3
It can be tough. But, sometimes we’ve got to get our hands a little dirty as we sift through time in order to be on the right side of history. Remember, as Mark Derr said at the beginning of this show, we need to learn about history in order to avoid repeating some of it. I went down some deep, dark Internet rabbit holes in order to relay this story to you. Again, I’m sparing you the details, but we need to talk about some stuff. Here’s Mark taking us up to the 20th century and beginning Part 3 with the gritty history of one of my favorite dog breeds…

Mark: “[General George S.] Patton had a bull terrier that went around with him. Pit bulls—the Staffordshire terrier as it’s known—were fighting dogs. But fighting dogs were not viewed the way they are now.”

“I’ll skip past some of those details I was talking about…”

Mark: “Let’s just say it’s a blood sport, and most people in this country do not seem bothered by blood sports. You used to be able to get the rules for constructing your fighting pit up until the 1930s when the last one was published. The United Kennel Club was founded in part to register fighting dogs, and to have them was not considered as disgusting as it is now.”

“It’s important to note that just because pit bulls were used for blood sport, that doesn’t mean pit bulls are predisposed to vicious behavior. We should always respect an animal’s capability, but there’s a reason why we can have these dogs in our homes.”

Mark: “Most dogs are pretty nice if you raise them properly. But if you want to abuse dogs and make them mean and vicious, then that’s what you do.”

“An even harder-to-stomach form of abuse was happening in Nazi concentration camps and witnessed by some US soldiers. Again, if you’re the kind of person who can handle a rabbit hole, some of my Internet research can be found in the show notes at dogsinourworld.com.”

Mark: “In WWII, the Germans used dogs in the concentration camps to keep prisoners in line and sometimes to maul them and kill them. It was well known. When the Allies liberated Dachau they promptly killed all the guards and dogs they found there. It was an act of vengeance, sure. It was definitely—probably—a war crime. It was to correct an even more egregious act which was the killing of six million Jews and other people.”

“Now, whether you think it was a war crime that US soldiers committed, or you’re about to wave the red, white, and blue—let’s not forget about a military prison that existed during my years in the service.”

Mark: “During the Iraq War, dogs were routinely turned on prisoners in Abu Ghraib. It was a big scandal, in fact. I believe they were army dogs that were turned on prisoners. And the Navy handlers—I may be getting this backwards, so don’t quote me—but anyways, the handlers for one branch turned their dogs on prisoners, and the others flatly refused, because the dogs weren’t trained to be used against humans that way.”

Me: “I’m going to have to look that up.”
Mark: “You can find the Abu Ghraib report. It hasn’t been suppressed yet. I might have it somewhere.”

“I did look it up. In 2006, the Los Angeles Times reported that Army Sergeant Santos A. Cardona was the 11th soldier convicted of crimes stemming from the abuse of Abu Ghraib inmates between 2003–2004. He was acquitted of the most heinous charges, which included unlawfully using his K-9 to bite an inmate and conspiring with another dog handler to frighten prisoners so badly that they soiled themselves. It’s rumored that it was a game among some of the K-9 handlers and intelligence officials within the prison.”

“In 2006, the New York Times reported that another K-9 handler, Army Sergeant Michael J. Smith, was also found guilty of crimes at the prison. CBS News mentioned Sergeant Smith in a 2006 story that quoted him saying to the jury, ‘soldiers are not supposed to be soft and cuddly.’ Smith was found guilty on 13 counts. In March 2010, the military’s highest court upheld Smith’s convictions.”

“Whew. Okay. Don’t worry—that’s the worst of it. But we did it. I feel it had to be done. Not only is it important to know history, but we also need to look to the future. As we come near the end of this episode, let’s think about the dogs in our world going forward.”

Adam: “Do you have a moral opinion on the use of dogs for military purposes?”
Mark: “I have moral opinions about the military use of dogs for military purposes. I think we’re long past the time where we should have wars of any sort. I don’t think dogs should be used as offensive weapons against people for any reason. That’s not why they exist. That’s why the Spaniards did it, and it was nasty business. The people up in North Dakota just had dogs turned on them in a very heinous fashion.”

Mark: “Those involved in the civil rights movement will remember dogs turned on them time and again. That’s not what dogs are for and should never be used for. The dogs used to protect the president perform a central function and are not used as offensive weapons against people. They shouldn’t be, anyway.”

“There’s definitely one big difference between the dogs from the New World and the ones now in our present-day world…”

Mark: “I came of age walking dogs off leash across college campus and through town and everything else. Now you couldn’t do that without someone complaining or busting you with a ticket.”

Adam: “What has changed?”
Mark: “Well, partly the mentality of people towards risk. There are a lot of people today who won’t let their kid play outside with or without a dog. It’s just a different world where people don’t go out and do things much anymore. Or, part of it is also numbers. There are so many dogs and people who don’t really try to control their dogs.”

“Looking to the future, Mark makes an ominous prediction about the large increase in the number of companion dogs in America.”

Mark: “It wasn’t too many years ago that you might have estimates that were 40–50 million dogs. Now there are 70+ million in the US alone. I fear there’s going to be a backlash against dogs, because dogs are a fad now. Fads have a tendency of disappearing.”

“Do you see where I’m going with all this? Mark has been trying to teach me that dogs are, and always have been, what we make them. We may not know exactly how they ended up in our world, but the great He or She obviously allowed dogs to be a bridge to something greater.”

“I still believe that our personal—and societal—relationship with dogs can often reflect our relationship with God or Mother Nature. I’m not doing Mr. Derr justice in this show. Whether you have a dog or not, I highly recommend you check out Mark’s work.”

Adam: “What are some great resources for any of us who want to learn more about dogs and history?”
Mark: “Well, my first book is about the dog–human relationship; that’s called Dogs’ Best Friend. My second book is A Dog’s History of America, which is about the role of dogs in American history. It does a pretty good job, I think, of covering the territory.”

“I interviewed Mark the week President Donald Trump was elected.”
Adam: “If Trump is going to get a dog, what kind of dog do you hope he ends up with?”
Mark: “I wouldn’t even make a suggestion. I would hope they didn’t get a dog. I would think that he wouldn’t want a dog, because the man is such a narcissist that he wouldn’t be able to share his attention with it.”
Me: “Are you going to let me air that?”
Mark: “Sure.”

That’s a wrap. It is so exciting to know that many people in the United States and other countries enjoy listening to this podcast. Once again, there are some very special people I couldn’t have done this without. Thank you to Dave Elkins for generously donating most of the music you hear in the show. Thank you to Mark Padgett for the production and technical assistance.

I can’t stop working on this project—it’s become a second job. I need to figure out a way to continue affording this show. Please, make a donation at dogsinourworld.com to help me cover the never-ending production expenses.

If you can’t afford a donation, could you tell two people about Dogs in Our World? Or leave a comment in places like iTunes or Google Play so other people can find us when using a search engine.

Next month, we’ll meet with author, professor, and philosopher Steven Hales and examine how dogs can help us better understand that big, elusive topic called Philosophy. Until then, I’ll see you at dogsinourworld.com.

If you enjoyed this episode:

In this debut episode, Adam Winston explores the story of North American wolves with Erik Wilber of Wolf Haven International. We cover:

Read on for key takeaways, resource links, and the full transcript.

Introduction

With the help of some generous folks, I’m proud to finally present the first installment of what will hopefully be a monthly series. And, just so you know, links to everything we’re going to talk about in today’s show—pictures, comment sections for all of you to provide feedback, and more details—can be found at dogsinourworld.com.

This episode is titled In the Beginning, and I’ve divided it into three parts. First, I’ll share what I recently learned about the history of wolves in North America and their current status here in the United States. The second part highlights popular theories on the evolutionary relationship between the wolf and dog—how we got the dog from the wolf. The third and final part explores what wolves can teach, or not teach, us about dogs. So let’s get started.

Even though my passion is for the domestic dog, as a young dog welfare professional I find it nearly impossible to avoid the subject of wolves. There’s a divisive, exhausting debate among dog enthusiasts that almost always traces back to wolves—what we think we know about them and how we compare dogs to wolf packs.

If you want to see the amount of content out there, simply Google “dog dominance theory” or “dog training debate.” You’ll get around two million results—no deep digging required. But this show is our chance to get answers from the source. Instead of another dog trainer telling me about wolves, I went to someone who lives with them every day.

Erik Wilber: My name is Erik Wilber, and I am an animal caretaker at Wolf Haven International. I’ve been here ten years now. I started as a volunteer in 2005, was hired in 2006, and haven’t looked back.

Erik spends nearly 24/7 with wolves, wolfdogs, and coyotes. He feeds them, prepares their diets, repairs enclosures, transports them for veterinary care, and manages social groups and conflicts.

Erik Wilber: It’s so much—feeding the wolves, preparing their food, repairing enclosures… When an animal needs the vet, I take them. I manage who goes where and handle every conflict that arises.

First, I asked Erik about the history of wolves in North America.

Erik Wilber: Wolves were everywhere in North America and coexisted with Native Americans. When Europeans arrived, they brought negativity—bounties on wolves, habitat destruction, and poisoning campaigns. From the 1600s until the 1970s, humans waged war on wolves, paying people a nine-to-five wage to kill them.

In 1973, the Endangered Species Act made killing wolves illegal, and restoration began. At that point, wolves only remained in Alaska, Canada, and northern Minnesota.

I was born in 1979 and didn’t realize that wolf repopulation happened in my lifetime. Today, you can find wolves—and even endangered red wolves—in many U.S. states.

Erik Wilber: We now have red wolves in North Carolina, Mexican wolves in the Southwest, packs in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Minnesota, Wisconsin, the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Canada, and Alaska.

At Wolf Haven International, you can see gray wolves, red wolves, wolfdogs, and coyotes up close—including rare Species Survival Plan (SSP) animals.

Erik Wilber: There are two North American species: red wolves (no subspecies) and gray wolves, which have five subspecies: Arctic, tundra (Great Plains), timber, Mexican, and Arctic wolves. Mexican wolves average 60–80 lb and have a tawny coat with a black cape.

Wolf Haven only breeds the federally managed Mexican and red wolves under the SSP. All other rescues are not bred to avoid adding more captive wolves.

At one point, only seven Mexican wolf founders remained. Wolf Haven doesn’t own them; the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service does. We just provide the habitat while the recovery program manages breeding and reintroduction.

Erik Wilber: We’re very careful about wolf exposure. Education is important, but we don’t want to overexpose these animals just for visitors.

Suddenly, a distant siren triggered a chorus of howls from the wolves and wolfdogs—an eerie reminder that we were guests in their world.

Erik Wilber: (Wolf howl audio)

That haunting howl was Caedus, a wolfdog at Wolf Haven. Sadly, his longtime companion Ladyhawk passed away shortly after our visit, so this episode is dedicated to her memory.

Most residents can’t return to the wild. But what about wild wolves slowly reclaiming their historic range? What can we do to help?

Erik Wilber: Become educated. If you live in a wolf state, monitor public comment periods for environmental impact statements. Make your voice heard.

Wolves aren’t just charismatic—they’re ecosystem engineers. Their presence triggers a trophic cascade that shapes entire landscapes.

Erik Wilber: Top predators like wolves control prey populations and influence vegetation growth—willows in Yellowstone exploded once wolves returned, benefiting beavers, songbirds, and aspen stands.

Erik Wilber: You can support Wolf Haven by symbolically adopting a wolf or becoming a member to receive our quarterly Wolf Tracks magazine. Follow us on Facebook (facebook.com/wolfhavenintl) and visit wolfhaven.org to book a reservation.

Erik Wilber: The big questions are when did wolves become dogs, where did it happen, and how? Fossils point anywhere from 36,000 to 10,000 years ago. Genetics gives clues on timing, archaeology on place, and anthropology on process—but they don’t always align.

Adam Winston: And could domestication be happening today?

Erik Wilber: Possibly—some studies suggest multiple domestication events that later merged.

Adam Winston: What about the “how”?

Erik Wilber: Two main theories: artificial selection—humans capturing wolf pups and breeding them—or natural selection—wolves scavenging near human camps, with the tamest surviving and breeding among themselves, eventually becoming dogs.

I lean toward natural selection. Early hunter-gatherers likely didn’t have the resources to raise wolves generation after generation. It makes more sense that wolves domesticated themselves on the fringes of human settlements.

Erik Wilber: Some scientists point to village or pariah dogs—feral dogs living beside humans without being pets. They may mirror that early scavenger niche and have been easier to domesticate than wild wolf pups.

Genetics is a “tomato soup” of mixed wolf and dog DNA—hard to tease apart. Ironically, humans share over 80% of our genes with dogs; chimpanzees share 96–98% with us.

Next, we’ll explore what wolves truly teach us about dogs in our world.

Many people cling to wolf-derived terms like “alpha,” “pack leader,” and “top dog” when training a house pet—often without realizing these ideas come from captive-pack studies, not wild behavior.

Erik Wilber: Early wolf researchers studied captive packs and coined “alpha” to describe fighting for dominance. But wild packs function as family units—breeding pairs and their offspring.

Adam Winston: So “alpha” implies constant competition that doesn’t exist in the wild.

Erik Wilber: In the wild, wolves disperse once mature, forming new packs. Captive wolves can’t disperse, so they compete for position. Dr. Mech, the researcher who popularized “alpha,” now recommends “breeding pair” or “parents” instead.

Applying “alpha wolf” rules to pet dogs can be misleading. Dogs have evolved for thousands of generations and don’t think or behave like wolves today.

Erik Wilber: I’ve bonded with wolves, but it’s not like my relationship with a dog. Wolves are independent, aloof—they come to me for food, then return to their routines.

Researchers at Wolf Park in Indiana socialize wolf pups intensively—taking ten- to fourteen-day-old pups and raising them around humans for three months to study more “natural” wolf behavior. Even they don’t call themselves “pack members” to the wolves.

Erik Wilber: They see people as separate. Even highly human-socialized wolves don’t treat humans like pack members.

Wolf behaviors sometimes appear “watered down” in dogs—play bows, social signals—but dogs have a world of their own.

Erik Wilber: For multi-dog households, you may see a loose pecking order, but it varies by breed, individual temperament, and context. Dogs are incredibly diverse.

Erik Wilber: Trying to force dogs into wolf roles can do them a disservice. Dogs deserve study on their own terms.

That wraps our first episode. We’ve covered the history and restoration of North American wolves, evolutionary theories on dog domestication, and why “alpha” belongs in the past. Thank you to Wolf Haven International for their support—and to our donors Susan in Washington and Andrew in Philadelphia for funding the howl recording.

Next month: a conversation with Mark Derr on the history of dogs in North America, or maybe a philosophical deep dive with Steven Hales. Either way, we’re only just beginning. Tell your friends about Dogs in Our World, leave us a review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify, and I’ll talk to you soon.

If you enjoyed this episode: