My turn to take a second bite.
Most dog owners would disagree with you here. I'm not one (anymore) but I can kind of see their point. Dogs exhibit personality (animality?). Maybe a lookalike with the same personality could be found, like when a child loses a beloved pet, and you want to replace it. The replacement might become just as beloved as the first, but so might a child born after a first died.
Plants and microbes, but beloved pets? I'm not so sure.
lite.cnn.com
Everything's philosophical. The philosophy that spirits or souls animate lifeforms beyond humans is part of witchcraft philosophy, but also the Chinese believe in such (the Chinese worship their ancestors as well).
My evidence to refute it is to hypothetically ask what veterinarians think, first of all, since they know these animals so much more thoroughly and objectively than pet owners do. And the second witness I'd call to the stand are ranchers and dairy farmers and shepherds; men who work with livestock. They know animals, including animals popular as pets, like dogs and cats, really well as well, and on a professional, disinterested level.
I say this because my own personal first hand experience with many kinds of pet types renders my view as valid as yours, even though our views are at odds, neither of us are good witnesses in this case of whether Fido has a soul. We'll just cancel each other out.
I just say Fido's 100% substitutable in the final analysis, and you'd disagree, and I don't think either of us could convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt who's right, but if a jury could be persuaded to render a verdict, I think it would be by expert witness testimony from veterinarians and secondarily from ranchers, because these parties have the most applicable direct first hand experience with animals. And if they all say the same thing, then I think that's as strong a case as can be made, but even then, all people are susceptible to being enthralled to selective, narrowly scoped error, such as what happened with Fauci and him claiming to personify science (obv not POLITICAL science but I digress)–anyway if they did all say the same thing, we can at least imagine what it might mean.
I find it highly implausible that ranchers would unanimously say that they recognized unsubstitutability in all their animals. That'd be like being in a job at Auschwitz. You come to find out personal nuances and details about each creature and then treat them all like cogs in a machine. I mean at best. A dairy rancher isn't killing his animals for business, he wants them alive and healthy. A sheep farmer wants his sheep producing wool. But to imagine dairy farmers who identify every creature's subtle differences from all the others all around them, only to treat them impersonally ... this is why ranchers would only be my second witness, after veterinarians.
Veterinarians ofc are employed by ranchers, but they also earn careers treating pets. So they know pets really really well. On a professional, objective, disinterested level. They're experts, and their expertise is relevant. What would they all say?
I just think they'd be divided. And that would mean they're not relevant as experts, because appealing to expert witness testimony is only valid to do when all those experts are in lockstep on the matter in question. So if it's as I suspect, and veterinarians are divided on whether or not pet animals are all substitutable in the final analysis, then I think it just remains an open question, which is why I started with the link to what witches think, because witches think animals are ensouled. So just for comparison.
This one is sticky, because our technology isn't yet at its highest point. Can personality be imbued in a machine? Maybe...
But it'll always be code, ones and zeroes. It's clearly substitutable, and trivially.
If you're going to argue that perhaps the entirety of computer code all together constitutes just one soul, and that computer-ness itself isn't substitutable ... I'd hear you out. That sounds like the "singularity" idea I've heard of from A.I. public commentators, but I don't really understand the idea very well.