Aggressive Puppy - Page 9

@noitsyou.

My analogy is not backwards. There are certain laws in nature which make dogs (and others) whatever they are and whatever the relationships between dog and other pack members are. . You can deny such rules and laws and not to use them and thus deny natural laws which build relationships and make the dog function . But such often backfires. Especially it backfires with dogs who use such laws themselves like the dominant puppy in OP. Now there may be some other breeds and individual dogs which do not depend as heavily on 4 pillars and they may be fine if you ignore some of the pillars. But to say I have trained the dog using only positive and dog was fine does not proof anything except that the trainer got away with ignoring some laws of nature.
JMO.

@Prager Sorry but your analogy is backward. Maybe it's a language issue since you are not American, or a native English speaker, but backward can also mean reverse. You went from a car with 4 wheels to 2 in your analogy, that's subtraction. Someone adding more variables or elements to their training is addition. I have the feeling you are the type of person who will insist on arguing to death any illogical argument he has so let's set that aside and take your analogy further. If you can drive a 4 wheel vehicle just as well on only 2 of its wheels then why would you drive on 4? It would save you money on tires. Applying YOUR logic to dog training, why would someone use 4 pillars (as you call them) if they can get the job done just as well with fewer than 4? My suggestion is that if you want to discuss dog training you avoid analogies because they are unnecessary and only serve to confuse people who don't know any better. Just stick with facts.

Prager said: "But to say I have trained the dog using only positive and dog was fine does not proof anything except that the trainer got away with ignoring some laws of nature. JMO."

The first problem is that you make a statement that appears to be factual, especially when you add the word proof, but at the end add JMO (just my opinion). If you make things clear when it comes to opinions and facts then you don't need to add JMO. Again, the people who know can discern opinion from fact, reality from theory, etc., but new people to GSDs and/or this type of working dog training may not catch the differences. This is the whole reason for my "public service announcement." With that said let's look at that conclusion from your post above which I quoted here. If a trainer uses a positive only approach and it works then he did not get away with anything. You saying that is not just an opinion dressed up as fact but flat out wrong. I can't say it is a lie on your part because I don't know you and I am not the type who uses that word lightly. It is still inaccurate however. The fact is, if a trainer gets the desired result he didn't get away with anything. That idea doesn't even make sense. The thing about the terms "getting away" or "got away" is that typically in usage it is a euphemism for doing something wrong. For example, a criminal got away with murder. In other words, it has a pejorative connotation. I don't know if you used that terminology on purpose to be disparaging or if it's something we can chalk up to your not being American. Regardless, it is inaccurate no matter your intention. If a trainer gets the desired result he didn't get away with anything: he simply did his job. If that dog saves his owner's life I don't think he is going to complain about some missing pillar.

Let's take a look at another word you used: ignoring. That's a conclusion which is not based on factual evidence. How do you know the trainer IGNORED those laws of nature as you call them? Not having a need for them to reach a desired result is not the same as ignoring. The trainer may know that they are there but doesn't use them because there is no need. Ignoring implies he doesn't acknowledge them which is a conclusion based on supposition. It's speculation and conjecture.

At some point theoretical considerations, dogma and overzealous adherence to methodological ideologies have to give way to pragmatism and practicality or, to put it simply: reality. I repeat for the new folks, always consider the result you want before deciding how to get there. It's all about you and your dog and not the ego of a trainer. Some more advice: the best trainers will always be flexible and conform to the dog rather than force the dog to conform to their methods. It's even worse when the method is purely theoretical. If you find a trainer who can only function following one method then find another trainer. It's all about what works, nothing more, nothing less, when it comes to the result you want.

Noitsyou,

Alot of knowledge to express, always nice. Enjoy knowing whos speaking, who's behind the sudo name. Whats your training facility.

Thanks in advance. :)

Goodness , I must have just fell off the "turnip truck " the car analogy had me lost. Aside from that I did learn a thing or two from this posting . Got a text from the owner , they are continuing training & things seem to be moving forward in a positive direction for the puppy. Still alot of work to be done.
Thanks

@Gigante I am no one special. There are many who are far more knowledgeable than I so I would hesitate to give specific training advice when there are better resources available. I do not have a training facility and would never claim to be a trainer, let alone a "master" trainer.

I am someone who just wanted to learn more, like most people who are here (I assume). I have no loyalties to anyone, any method, any breed (I do own a GSD), etc. I am still a newbie relative to some posters here and certainly to some of the genuine experts out in the world. However, I consider myself an "upperclassman" of newbies. I am not ashamed to admit that I have fallen for the rhetoric and unsubstantiated claims from so called experts. I consider myself well- educated and intelligent but those things are relative. When it came to dogs I was ignorant. Well, I wouldn't say I was ignorant when it comes to dogs since I have always had them in my life but rather when it came to the business of dogs I was very naive.

I do not want to tell people how to train their dogs or where or from whom to buy them. I want to simply give them advice on how to avoid making the mistakes I have made and/or repeating the mistakes they have already made. I just want to help new people navigate some of the posts they will read here to get to the substance of them, if there is any, so they can make an informed decision. Some posters like to talk in circles, embellish their posts with superfluous information, and make irrelevant (and often incorrect) references and analogies that only divert the attention from what is really being said or more importantly what isn't being said. I want to point out to the new people the tactics that are used to convince them that something is true. I never intended on posting here but I finally decided enough is enough. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice....I have nothing to sell, all I want is to help people not get suckered.

Hello. I just want to say that I agree with Hans on the fact that it is highly effective to use all four positive/negative rewards/punishments.

During my psych classes in college, we had to learn about all these.

That being said, you can still 100% train dogs positive reinforcement only. My show/working line mix dog learned quickly this way, and treats are later replaced with praise. I never used positive punishment with her.

@Reliya I agree that it can be effective. I disagree that it is the only effective method.

Reliya that is bull shite 100 percent positive in that way u are only during 50 percent of your tools it make the training a lot harder . And what do u do when the dog does not do what he is told and won't sit or down Or even worse won't come on a recal ???

@yogidog If we are going to talk in what ifs then what if your dog never doesn't do what he is told? Also, you say it makes the training harder. That is relative to what the trainer feels. If he feels it takes more effort but knows he will get the desired result then that's his decision to make. I've unfortunately seen dogs get "corrected" by a swift kick and it was very effective in curbing the unwanted behavior but I don't think it was effective in creating a well-trained dog overall. I'm not saying I disagree with using negative corrections but that it isn't a case of one method works and one doesn't.

"but that it isn't a case of one method works and one doesn't"

Actually that's exactly the case some dogs people etc require pain or negative consequence either physical or mental in order to learn.

Pleasure is an effective tool for some to learn by and in those cases pain is not necessary. Others no amount of pleasure works. Nothing like a scar from touching a red hot burner or a shin kissing a ball hitch. I watch the hell out for my hitch from my truck. Anything very effective.... was a contributor to the overall. How could it not be.