I think the point is still with Lid -and on what is expressed by Will S. We made dogs what they are now through thousands of years of artificial selection -first intuitively searching for good hunters, later for shepherds, and later specifically for aesthetics or refined roles. But is the bond that we create throughout those years what makes the difference: though you can create a bond with pigs, goldfish, rabbits or cows (Buster Keaton included), the uniqueness of our relationship with dogs is that we have unleashed dogs inside our homes (only cats share that "privilege", though the nature of the bond with them is completely different). We might have tailored them for our ever-changing purposes (for detecting drugs, for rescuing victims of disasters, for helping blind people), but it is mainly the love we have typecasted into them (and by reflection into ourselves) what grants them that unique place in front of the fireplace or under the bedcovers on a Sunday morning. Something like the small robot kid on "Artificial Intelligence", but on a much broader and profound scale. We have systematically taught them to love us almost inconditionally -the hard way, the manipulative way, the sincere way- and we have decided to love them; whether this was achieved by taking the alpha-place on their universes or by mutally covering each others' back, day thru night since the caveman times, is beyond the point. The kind of love man and dogs share is unique.

Of course, this bond is only be truly significative within the loose boundaries of Western civilization.