Some people prefer cats to dogs and some are the other way around. Some people are like cats while others are like dogs. The differences are fascinating when you start to think about it.
Cats are independent, sometimes moody, can be loving but rarely towards everybody, and pretty hard to train. They do what they want, more or less, and you can't get rid of their behaviors like scratching furniture; you can only attempt to convince them to satisfy their needs in a less destructive manner (i.e. with a scratching post). Cats will be quite happy, left to themselves, and don't really care about approval from anybody else.
Dogs are the opposite. They need companionship and attention and approval from whoever they live with. They'll bend over backwards six times sideways to do tricks for you and do whatever you want them to. They tend to be friendlier than cats, at least if raised well. Dogs are the epitome of a social animal, surpassing even humans in their need for companionship and family.
*dons the "armchair psychoanalyst" hat*
I find that most people can be considered Cats or Dogs. A few people I've known have been right in the middle, but they're quite rare and often feel conflicted between the two sides. No prizes for guessing that I'm 95% Cat...The 5% dog is my frequent desire to impress and amaze authority figures I know, though that is mostly just to see the looks on their faces, and is rarely synonymous with "doing exactly what they want me to do."
Dogs are far, far more common that Cats among the human population, I'd reckon 90-98%, though the Internet has a larger Cat percentage (for now). This should come as no surprise, as society requires a serious cooperative mentality in order to maintain itself, and Cats are more individualistic than Dogs. Not to say that there's anything wrong with being a Dog or Cat. Dogs often have an easier time being socially accepted, working with others and making friends, while Cats tend to be more self-reliant, original, and independent.
When you think about evolutionary history, it all makes a lot more sense: Historically, felines have always been solitary predators. Lions are the only ones that hunt together. Canines such as wolves, on the other hand, work in packs that act as a team. Teamwork allows a pack to get more and bigger prey than a solitary hunter, but hunting alone gives an individual hunter a bigger share or each meal.
And there's the fundamental difference between "good" and "evil" in society: Cooperation, like dogs, helps everyone more than if each of us worked alone, and is at the core of being "good." Individualism, like cats, means getting a bigger share for yourself but not necessarily helping others, and is frequently identified with "evil."
This does not mean Cat people are evil and Dog people are just. It is entirely possible to have a malicious and spiteful Dog, or a kind and pacifistic Cat. I am merely making extremely broad generalizations of archetypes, not individuals, and comparing those archetypes to modern sociological attitudes. Though in movies, the frequency of evil masterminds stroking white Persians while the hero plays with his dog has gotten so bad it's an official cliche.
So what are you? Would you consider yourself a Dog, Cat, or in-between? Or maybe something else entirely? (Iguana? Opossum? Platypus?) I'd be interested to hear your opinions.
