Sam Gosling at UT has developed a personality test for dogs. This sounds like fodder for late night talk show comic monologues, but it's apparently a serious effort to try to understand mammalian personality.
Which is a good thing, I think. There's been a huge amount of study of human personality—what else is psychology and psychiatry all about, to say nothing of, um, fiction—but virtually no serious study of animal personality. Yet, anyone who has had pets knows that animals of the same breed may vary wildly in personality type.
Which brings up the issue: why does personality exist at all? Why isn't there an ideal personality for every species which evolution guides that species towards? Why doesn't every dog, every llama, and every human react the same to stresses, challenges, joys? Are there survival advantages to there being different personalities within a species? For humans, it's nice, of course, that everyone doesn't think and act the same. But why did we evolve that way? Nature conserves stuff that increases survival, not niceness.
農耕 == noukou == farming
|Left radical was originally a character only found in Chinese, meaning 'plow'. Right radical is 'well' (井), acting phonetically to express 'conquer'. I.e., to 'conquer with a plow'. Henshall suggests remember the left radical as a many-branched 'tree' (木), and as a mnemonic: 'Till around well and many branched tree.'|