A real dog trainer by definition should be training dogs for specific tasks – not behaviours. Period. Full stop. They can train dogs for agility, sniffing (drugs, bombs etc), seeing eye dogs etc. That’s what a dog trainer is supposed to be – and we absolutely need to get back to that. There are some great dog trainers out there – but they know to keep their nose out of the behaviour ring.
Robert Cabral is selling t-shirts with the slogan “science has no place in dog training” – and he’s right. All you need to train a dog for a specific task is some common sense, and skill. No science required. Here’s the issue – Robert Cabral considers himself a expert in behaviour. But he can’t define the very word that he claims to be an expert in. And of course – B.F Skinner gets the blame.
A real behaviourist needs to understand what a behaviour is – they shouldn’t be training dogs at all. Behaviourism has become a tool to be wielded – when in actuality – it is a science to be understood. The very science of Psychology is the very study of the mind and behaviour. In Skinners own words – the very object of the science of behaviour is discovering its causes. Something is driving the behaviour – and that something is your very emotions – your instincts. Self control or “self management of behaviour” is learning to control your emotions – your instincts – that cause your behaviours in the first place.
But dog training doesn’t care about causes – dog training is a solution without a diagnosis. Why? Because they are pushing Edward Thorndike’s Methodological behaviourism – not Skinner and Radical behaviourism. And in Skinners own words.
Dog trainers do NOT belong in the behaviour ring at all. They need to get out of the behaviour ring – because none of these dog trainers have any understanding of the science of behaviour.
The Anti_Dog_Trainer on youtube really believes that I’m making all this personal with him. He doesn’t seem to realize that he is the very epitome – a true representation of what is called dog training today – and the very ignorance that comes with it. People like the Anti_dog_trainer have behaviourist on their business card – and they don’t deserve it. Read his own words. The_Anti_Dog_Trainer is a respresentation of most dog trainers out there. They don’t give a shit about science – they are just making it all up as they go along. And people are screaming “Why isn’t this working”?
But, he has freely admitted that doesn’t give a shit about Skinner or the science of behaviour. He fully admitted that he doesn’t even know who Edward Thorndike is – the very father of Methological Behaviourism that is Dog training. Someone please – make this make sense to me? Make it make sense to you?
The only definition of the word behavior that the anti_dog_trainer has is from B.F Skinners book “Behaviour Of Organisms” published in 1938 – nearly 90 years ago. Now understand – Zak George pushes the same – and so does his enforcer account Kunzite. Go ask him to define the word behaviour – this is what you are going to get – if you get an answer at all. Welcome to the cash cow that is dog training.
And I guarantee – trainers have never read the book “Behaviour of Organisms”. How do I know this? Because it’s not convenient to their definition of Positive Reinforcement. That definition hasn’t changed – here is a direct quote from the same book. Positive Reinforcement is the removal of Negative Reinforcement.
Christopher Clugston (Top-Dog K9 Training) defined it the best – the only dog trainer that I have ever heard define what “Positive Reinforcement” is. In his words – “your Positive Reinforcement” is that you don’t die. In the face of something you deem negative – Negative Reinforcement. You fight – attack it or chase it away – or you flight – you move away from it. Or you become indifferent to it – neutral – socialized – make it not a big deal.
Skinner wrote Walden 2 in 1948 – and he explained this in one paragraph. One paragraph decimates the entire system of dog training.
Let me explain this to you in layman terms. Your reactions to anything in the environment comes with 3 options – and you are not in control of these options. Fight, flight or become indifferent.
“To some things we are indifferent” – you rationalized through any possible fear and made it not a big deal – that’s option 3. But dogs don’t get that option – you are being told to interfere in the dogs rationalization process – they can never become indifferent because trainers are telling you to reward and punish the dogs behaviour instead.
“Other things we like – we want to happen again – and we take steps to make them happen again”. These are Positive Consequences – the things that you want – this is what reinforces your behaviours – Positive Reinforcements.
Still other things we don’t like – we don’t want them to happen and we take steps to get rid of them or keep them from happening again. These are the Negative things you don’t want in your life – the Negative Reinforcements. And you do this through a fight and flight response. Just like the dog.
When your dog is acting like an idiot on a leash raging at the world – that is the dogs very Positive Reinforcement – they are having a fight or flight response trying to remove something they deem negative in the environment.
Skinner wasn’t interested in relationships – he was focused on self management of behaviours. Self control. And once you self manage your behaviours – you go into a calm state – that is Positive Reinforcement – all Negative Reinforcements removed. There is nothing Negative in the environment to shape your behaviours. How is this best explained – let me refer to another book from Skinner writeen in 1974 – About Behaviourism. That book will rattle your brain and I suggest people read it.
Trainers are trying to use Negative Reinforcement and Punishment in the same fashion. Punishment is the forced application of negative reinforcement – example – smacking your child on the ass.
Negative Reinforcements shape behaviours remember? In the face of a Negative Reinforcement – you fight, flight or become indifferent. Let me finish with an example of that.
If you’re relaxed on the couch with a good book and a glass of wine – you’re in Positive Reinforcement – that state of calm where no Negative Reinforcements exist to shape your behaviours. Now if a hairy tarantula suddenly walks across the floor in front of you – that spider is likely going to be a Negative Reinforcement that causes you to fight and flight. You can kill the spider or throw it outdoors – that’s your Positive Reinforcement – the removal of Negative Reinforcement – your very “fight” response. You can jump on a chair or run away from the spider – that’s also your Positive Reinforcement – you are attempting to remove yourself from the Negative Reinforcement – your very “flight” response.
And what exactly “causes” that fight or flight response? A buildup of excess cortisol and adrenaline in your body – your very fight or flight hormones.
But punish a hormonal response to something in the environment right? Reward that hormonal response to something in the environment? And people are screaming “Why isn’t this working!?!”
Fire your dog trainer – they don’t belong in the behaviour ring at all – and they don’t belong in your home. Period – end of blog!