Aggressive Puppy - Page 12

Alan, Dick uses Ecollar besides clicker, but you are right he trains very positive,

the first person who mostly succeedit in training a dog in KNPV on positive/clicker system was adrie van de wagen, she had an awesome trained malinois female Jessie, with bunch of obedience titles, IPO titles and certified KNPV PH1, only she told me the positive approach worked up till the bitework, cant teach a high drive dog to out on a cooky

she was one of the first to introduce new techniques from other disciplines in IPO and KNPV

As i said before we are on the same page.

You are right, i forgot about Adrie absolutely great trainer.

Centurion
Mindhunt EXCELLENT posts!!!!
I wish I could say it as well as you have. Everybody here should read those  2 Excellent posts!

As far as 4 pillars goes, I would say that when you start training a dog you do not know the dog in front of you. Thus you need to keep your mind open and use all 4 pillars when needed and as needed and not any more or any less than necessary. To say I will not use this or that up front is not wise.
Also remember the purpose of the training the sit down stay come heel,... is IMO only 25% of the purpose of the training where most trainers today see it as a 100% . The rest 75% is building correct relationship with the dog .

@duke, you brought up people and how the newer generation is worse than the older ones. I'm saying all generations have good and bad. This is why I advise people to be careful with analogies. Duke brought up children and how they are now taught (or how he thinks they are taught) vs the good old days and which method produced better people. I'm saying that reality says neither making it a poor analogy.

your opinion is worth as much as anyone elses here, im fine with that

Duke1965, Let's address very quickly some misunderstandings in your post.

1) There is a huge difference between positive training and permissive parenting.  Positive training utilizes consequences, boundaries, and rewards.  Permissive parenting is usually the result of misguided attempts to be buddies, neglectful parents, exhausted parents, or parents that don't understand setting boundaries and rewards and consequences. 

2) Pre-70's schooling, it was believed that learning disabilities did not exist and someone that had any was just lazy or stupid.  Harsh regimes did not take into consideration the different ways that children learn, visually, hands on, etc.  Paddlings were common as was belittling, humiliation, and general ignoring influences from home environment.  Family matters were exactly that, ignored and kept in the family such as physical and sexual abuse.

3) Again you confuse positive methods with permissive methods in regards to teaching. 

4) For the third time, you misunderstand what positive training is.  You tell the dog the command once and only once, whether it is teaching the concept or after the concept is understood.  If the dog does NOT understand the concept, you help it by calmly showing what you want and then reward when the dog does it the next time you give the command.  Once the concept is understood, again you say the command only ONCE and correct if the dog does not obey. 

5)  To utilize wild canids approach to correcting a dog is based on an incorrect assumption  We do not totally understand the dog's body language even to this day, we cannot reproduce it correctly because we don't fully understand it and don't possess the body parts that are utilized in much of the "language."  Besides, wild canids and domestic dogs are different and to believe that wild canids and domestic dogs are exactly the same is simplistic. 

6) The "soft approach" that you describe is NOT the reason we are in this mess today with society as you believe.  It is much more complicated and complex than that.  I am not going to go into the sociological, psychological, educational, and socioeconimic reasons for it. 

You keep giving examples of incorrect positive methods so maybe it might be useful to actually learn what correct applied behaviorism positive methods really are because some of the concepts may be interesting for you to use.  As for training police K9s in positive methods (correct applied behaviorism positive methods), my good friend has trained for 35+ and is quite successful at it, her dogs are pretty reliable and she is very successful in re-educating dogs incorrectly trained using compulsion training. 

Prager - wow, thank you..........

Mindhunt. excellent post again. It is refreshing to read this.
I have question . You are explaining in point 4 what are positive methods. The way you explain it is basically exactly the same way I am doing it. However I call it positive x negative or +/- . That is how Koehler basically teaches the principle even though IMO some of his applications were harsher than they needed to be. But in principle it is what he taught. So why is it called "positive" training when it uses positive punishment ( correction) which is not too positive at all. Basically my question is about nomenclature.
Also for clarity reasons I would like to ask you for your definition and examples of "compulsion". I would define it as use of force during learning stage. But would you say correction after the dog understands the command is or is not called compulsion. Again this is a question about nomenclature. I just want to talk using correct terms for appropriate actions.