Sometimes things don’t necessarily evolve to have a specific benefit. They just happen, and don’t get selected out because they’re not a detriment to the species.
I know you’re right, but I actually think this one is an evolutionary benefit, just not ours. The cuteness traits won the evolutionary race because cuteness causes this feeling in humans that will make them more likely to get taken in by us.
(I don’t know shit about science, I just think pets have their shit figured out)
It’s probably mostly a side effect of our ability to feel love for each other.
As a group animal we have an instinct to protect each other that is born from love, that instinct help us survive as a group. The pet is included and can become part of the group maybe even family.
This trait has also helped us build relations with some animals that have historically been beneficial to our survival, like dogs horses and farm animals. For less immediately “useful” pets, the instinct is the same, and although it doesn’t serve the same purpose, it may be helpful psychologically to overcome hardship, and maybe tie the group together more closely.Pet = baby human
My hypothesis has always been that we find baby (and adult!) animals cute to incentivize us to care for them when they need care, because our ancestors benefited tremendously from their presence in our lives. I agree that it probably started as accidental overlap from parental instincts but I think the feeling is too strong and applies to too many distinct animals to be coincidental.
That said, this is just my pet theory and I have no evidence for it.
Given that domesticated animals adopted some human baby like actions, it is a plausible theory.