Learning and understanding are two different things, FK. Experimental psychology has proven that long time ago; an organism does not require understanding to learn.
To "understand" involves grasping of the meaning, comprehension.
To "learn" involves acquiring a skill. Thus, learning and understanding ( comprehending) is not mutually exclusive or necessarily mutually interdependent, as is the case with need and want.
And just from personal experience our dog treats every individual family member differently, based on his perceived station for us. I am the "king", etc. That HAS to involve some understanding.
And ants know who the queen is, FK, but I doubt they "understand" why.
***To “understand” involves grasping of the meaning, comprehension.
To “learn” involves acquiring a skill. Thus, learning and understanding ( comprehending) is not mutually exclusive or necessarily mutually interdependent, as is the case with need and want.***
I doubt that it is a significant step from frogmarching the uncomprehending to, well, the reduction of the human to the animal. Regardless of the mechanism, it still involves the elimination of the understanding and the free will of understanding and agreeing to the process or goal.
Either mankind willingly chooses the love of God and eternal life or else he does not. Scripture consistently describes the path of salvation for the willing - it involves choice and action from choice. It does not address those in the armchair who get plucked via an uncomprehensible fashion for unknown reasons to an undeserved eternal reward.
I would apply that meaning to a dog on some things. If your definition of "understanding" is only in human terms, then you obviously think that only humans can have understanding. My comparison has to do with "to the best of ability given the creation". It sounds like you are saying we cannot understand anything of God because we ARE NOT God. In the same way you appear to be saying that dogs can't understand anything because they are not humans. I disagree with this approach. Why is it so impossible for humans, created in God's image, to have SOME understanding that is REALLY TRUE, although it is not exhaustive understanding? I still don't know why some appear to "need" the all or nothing paradigm. There shouldn't be anything forcing it.
To "learn" involves acquiring a skill.
Huh? I thought learning involved acquiring knowledge, if not also wisdom. When I first came across you on FR I learned your screen name. What skill did I acquire that I didn't have before?
FK: And just from personal experience our dog treats every individual family member differently, based on his perceived station for us. I am the "king", etc. That HAS to involve some understanding.
And ants know who the queen is, FK, but I doubt they "understand" why.
Not the same thing at all. My dog knows I'm the king BECAUSE I am the biggest, the strongest, my voice is the most commanding, and I play with him the roughest. He bites me (playfully) MUCH harder than he does my daughter because he knows. He has SOME understanding, although it is not exhaustive. In fact, his understanding is really all he needs to be a beloved pet in our household. As God ordained it. Likewise, our understanding is all we need to be beloved children of God. As God ordained it.
In truth, we are MUCH MUCH MUCH closer to knowing God than our pets are to knowing us. Our pets were not created in the image of humans.