How Dogs Apologize to Their Humans (NOT What You Think!)

My four dogs have only one emotional response whatever 😅😅

Dogs DO feel sorrow and guilt!!! My dashchund was a "biter" until he was almost two years old. I had tried everything! Finally, one day he bit me and because it really hurt, I started crying. He looked absolutely startled came to me immediately and licked my hand all over. This was months ago. He has not bitten me since that day, and is EXTRAORDINARILY careful to bite softly when we play wrestling. This is obvious and apparent because if the pressure is too hard, he releases immediately and checks to make sure I am NOT hurt. You really DON'T know dogs!!!
I could tell you other stories about my GREAT PYRENEES and their obvious sorrow and guilt feelings, but you won't listen, so I waste my time.

I’m a former research scientist & lifetime dog owner. I don’t agree that dogs don’t feel a type of pride. I’ve seen it in my German Shepherd Dogs, & others, especially when they are successful in some physical sport. You can see it in their physical demeanor, how they’ll perk up and carry themselves.

As far as forgiving your dog goes, there’s nothing to forgive. It would be the equivalent of getting angry & blaming a 2 yr old child for spilling a drink, or peeing their pants.

If your dog is acting out , tearing things up, not listening, the fault lies with the owner. Usually it’s just bc the owner is lacking in some basic information & understanding of dog behavior

Dogs have morals -all social animals do. They are just not exactly the same as the ones humans have. And even humans don't always have the same moral rules. Morals evolve via biological and cultural evolution. Morals are the "lubricant" of cooperative behavior. Even bees have been shown to have morals. For example, one day, after some hard foraging, a bees come back to the hive inebriated because she drank from fermenting fruit. Nobody cares. But if she keeps on doing it, and neglects her duties of looking after larvae, keeping the hive clean etc, they will string her to death, because her actions are threatening the safety of the hive, and hence the whole community.
A ridiculously simple experiment with two dogs: Give one dog treats and not the other. They will react like most humans and children. The unfavoured dog will stare at you, or even bark, because they KNOW that they are not being fairly treated. And if those two dogs are good friends, the "spoilt" dog will share the treat with his unfortunate friend. Or even look guilty, with no other prompts from you than the action of giving treats.
Dogs of different breeds, and individual dogs can vary widely-just like humans.
A lot of errors even in the scientific study of animal behavior is the mistake many humans make about the origins of morality. They just assume that humans are 'special" and some deity endowed them with morals, instead of the obvious, and testable idea of examining how biological and social/cultural evolution works.
Similar mistaken assumptions are made about animal cognition, which is usually underestimated, until the last two or three decades.
Corvids [crows, magpies, etc] for example. Extremely clever birds. Complex problem solving skills, learning ability, strong inter-personal relationships, facial recognition of individual humans, and long-term memory. And relatively complex vocalizations. Definitely abstract thought. And probably "theory of mind". Because they are good at making predictions of other animal and human behaviors. Most crows for example, will not only care for their own young, but the young of their parents, if they have time. And how do these relatively small animals get such high cognitive abilities. Scientists are beginning to understand how. One way is neural density, which is much higher in corvids than humans, and lots of neural connections. That is how corvids pack such brain power into a small space. And because their lifestyle involves a lot of flying, natural selection selects for small brains.
Comparing relative intelligence between very different animal groups is like comparing apples to oranges. Because obviously, survival heuristics is not going to be the same for avian and ground dwelling species. Crows do not have language in the same sense that humans do, no do they have hands, or opposable thumbs. So the ways they use their intelligence will be different to how we use ours.
Thankfully gone are they days when most scientists just assume that non-human animals are little more than automata.
In fact the same sort of bad assumptions were made about humans who did not develop a written language. Human arrogance, and often religiously motivated.
And yes, humans will often "project" their own feelings and motivations onto animals, assuming that animals think the same way we do. This too is incorrect. To understand what is actually going on requires nuance. Answers are usually not "digital", meaning a simple yes or no. Yes, "apples" are not "oranges", but they are both fruit. That kind of thing.