I think treat training is cruel. - Page 45

Pedigree Database


by Prager on 14 December 2018 - 04:12

Apple, spare me, for once, of your inane negative remarks. Just because you do not understand or not agree with other peoples opinions does not mean that they are "ridiculous'. At some time people who believed that sun is running around the earth thought that people who believed the opposite - the earth is running around the sun - are ridiculous.  Also, my is not "belief", but it is a fact. Scientific fact - as matter of fact( pun intended). And I have documented by excellent scientific study. 

Question: Are you going to remember better a man who goes by you and does nothing or go by you and kick you in the genitals? I do not know as for you. but I would remember better that later. 

Also, while abuse it stresses and I used it in my initial example just to be funny and make to logical people obvious point I would not claim unlike you are equating that teaching under stress is always equal to abuse. In search of truth, it is advisable to abandon PC ideology and look to the reality of nature. It is characteristic of PC ideology to argue opposite to scientific studies - which I have presented - disregarding facts to preconceived PC ideological dogma. As far as fear of hights go such is not learned but it is inherited instinct which emerges at a certain age.
It seems to me that you are mixing learning while under unrelated stress and learning by stress. For example, I can use operant conditioning's negative reinforcement as learning by stress. There, unlike in your example of a hickory stick is nothing abusive about that.
It is a matter of survival to remember things which are stressful in order to survive. Nowhere have I said that remembering of pleasant things ( like a treat of remembering a source of food is not memorable. However, I have said same as the study, that learning things which are stressful is more memorable than anything else.
That is why many trainers are using E-collars because they are effective stressors used on any level. As far as your other questions I suggest that you start another thread.


by Prager on 14 December 2018 - 06:12

Apple about me: . Plus, he sees himself and his dogs as "old style" and it is apparent by the way he relates to people, that he is prone to creating conflict.ple: . Plus, he sees himself and his dogs as "old style" and it is apparent by the way he relates to people, that he is prone to creating conflict.


Prager: FYI I do not see my self as an "Old style" that is an feeble attempt for insult generated by nincompoops who think that they "discovered America" when they are using a clicker or talking about Marker training or even about operant conditioning as if it would be some novel training while such training was done probably by a caveman. I see my self as a trainer where new meets old if it withstands my muster of a critical thinking. 

 As far as me being prone to create conflict?.... Well yes.I am not here to fulfill anybody's expectations.  Without conflict of opinions, we could just stroke each others ego here and then go to sleep.  I love to shake people out of their box of thinking and show them that outside their box is all big world out there. I like people open their mind and to think out of the box of their established ways. Obviously to most people, this is contrary to their nature which prefers to maintain a lazy status quo. Do not rock the boat, do not shake the cages of our opinions which imprisons us.   That is what most people want. That is why they see me as creating conflict. Without critical thinking and without the trouble of conflict we would still be in the cave with stone tools or at least we would think the earth is flat.  I love conflict, without conflict and trouble, there is not a life worth living. If you want to live without conflict then stay in bed. 

 Look what Galileo Galilei or Giordano Bruno who got burnt by the stake went through and you think this is a conflict?! LOL! Some people go and think and others feel threatened by other people's thoughts and instead of critically thinking they, just as you, result to ad hominem attacks. Let me be the first to say that while I work on my opinions very hard I understand that I, same as every man is, wrong since truth is graspable only by God. Speaking of Galileo he said; "Who would set a limit to the mind of man? Who would dare assert that we know all there is to be known?" That is why I post here to see if someone can show me a better way. But instead, all I see is people defending their "box". When I post an OP as I have done here, then I am looking for an intelligent and logical discussion founded on evidence and logical disagreements. Instead,  there is no refutation based on supporting evidence. Instead, I am just being disappointed by arbitrary, unfounded, and full of sophistry, opinions without a logical context which invariably out of desperation to fail to argue a point intelligently end in insulting me. Then, I know that I must be right.

mrdarcy (admin)

by mrdarcy on 14 December 2018 - 10:12

Baerenfangs Erbe said

" I really don't have time to continue to argue with you, Prager. I'll stick to training my dogs my way and you stick training your dogs your way. Nobody is going to convince anyone here. "

At last some common sense, so correct and the way it should be.

by apple on 14 December 2018 - 13:12

Just because I don't agree with your opinions also does not mean they are not ridiculous. And again, your read something and twist it to meet your wants. I never said a word about teaching under stress equating with abuse. Stress and survival have nothing to do with teaching a pup or a young dog how to sit. Seems like you're getting a little grandiose talking about God and Galileo in the context of a simple issue like using positive reinforcement to teach early behaviors and help build your relationship with your dog.


by Prager on 14 December 2018 - 15:12

Apple : I never said a word about teaching under stress equating with abuse.

Prager: of course you have said it. You said: "I guess teachers should go back to the Hickory stick when teaching 1st graders.  And then you talk about dog falling off the roof. 
Beating 1st grader with "Hickory stick" and all that oter stuff in your post sounds like an abuse to me. Doesn't it? 
As far as your "ridiculous" goes. If you say such a thing then you ought to post some evidence otherwise it is just a sophistry. So far you are just posting unfounded opinions and insults, where I have posted scientific study.


by Prager on 14 December 2018 - 15:12

Baerenfangs Erbe said:

" I really don't have time to continue to argue with you, Prager. I'll stick to training my dogs my way and you stick training your dogs your way. Nobody is going to convince anyone here. "
Prager: Of course you can train the way you want. Nobody is stopping you. This is just a discussion,...exchange of opinions hopefully based on some evidence and facts.

by apple on 14 December 2018 - 16:12

I was referring to dogs and the Hickory stick was an example of a poor way to teach young children, which is analogous to exposing pups and young dogs to compulsion when it is much better to teach them how to learn and use positive reinforcement. And the example of the dog falling of the roof is learning with no one providing teaching such as with a handler.


by emoryg on 14 December 2018 - 16:12

Apple, it may help if you explain how you teach a dog to learn, and define compulsion.

by apple on 14 December 2018 - 17:12

When I say teaching a dog to learn, I am referring to it in the context of a pup/young dog/untrained dog being exposed to initial foundation work, regardless of whether it is protection, obedience, tracking, etc. The context is also that of using positive reinforcement, as the untrained dog does not have a repertoire of learned behaviors that are associated with verbal commands. By teaching the young prospect to learn, I am referring to self discovery and indirect learning. This is different than the handler being committed to teaching the dog, or the old style, militant training requiring the trainer to take charge and make the dog do it now. The handler is the boss, orders the dog to do the behavior and then makes the dog do the behavior. The opposite approach is to observe the dog and use positive reinforcement. With indirect learning you reinforce successive approximations of the end behavior. Just like in the video Baerenfang posted in teaching the dog to open the drawer. The pup/dog early on, grasps the concept that he can get what he wants through exhibiting the desired behavior. This leads to motivating the dog to try and keep on trying as opposed to exhibiting a behavior to avoid negative consequences. So training is more the dog is learning a cue for behavior rather than a command to be immediately obeyed. We are helping the dog learn. We set them up for success rather than avoiding negative consequences. As the dog learns how he can get more of what he wants, he starts to think and try more and more. He is trying his best to get it right rather than worrying about getting it wrong. For these reasons, this approach leads to a better relationship with the dog. With compulsion, or forcing a dog to do something or punishing him for not doing something, especially when the dog hasn't even learned what you want, you create conflict and damage the relationship. And as I have said over and over, this is for foundation training and has nothing to do with PC, all positive training, etc. Any dog with strong drive is going to need corrections at some point. Even puppies need punishment for certain behaviors at times. It is about the overall approach. You will also notice that dogs trained with a foundation of positive reinforcement will offer spontaneous rehearsal or the enthusiastic offering of different behaviors when they still haven't fully learned a specific command. You won't see this with a foundation of compulsion/negative reinforcement/punishment.

by apple on 14 December 2018 - 17:12


This is for you on two levels.  Can you figure them both out?




Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top