What can you contribute?

BTW, Marvin is sooo distracted in the class by so many other things going on, I cheat and use hand signals. The hand signals apear to be stronger than the clicker.

 
Scout is also more responsive to hand signals - I think most dogs are. I train her with both, and I guess as a bonus if she ever lost her hearing we wouldn't have much re-training to do!

ORIGINAL: ron2

The clicker and treats disappears! Once the dog is trained to your liking, then live your life with the dog and have fun and share life experiences together

Yes but some people speak of clicker training as the be all, end all with a devoutness usually reserved for the cultish followers of CM and there's got to be some goodness in using it.

I don't think of the click as something in the dog's language. A click would something in a dolphin's language, though. But it would be an identifiable sound to link behavior to reward.

I may not accomplish much with it, since I already have obedience moves trained and he will do them for a treat. He will do them much of the time without a treat in my hand. Or it might just help.

 
The fact of the matter is, it is fun and the dogs do enjoy the attention and activities and they do learn.  It really brings home the sight of the dog thinking, going through clicker associations and figuring out which one you want.  Sometimes you don't even see them going through the inventory because of their keen senses to my body languages as to what I want.  Espcially the hound with those hound eyes and ears.

ORIGINAL: Scout in Canada

BTW, Marvin is sooo distracted in the class by so many other things going on, I cheat and use hand signals. The hand signals apear to be stronger than the clicker.

Scout is also more responsive to hand signals - I think most dogs are. I train her with both, and I guess as a bonus if she ever lost her hearing we wouldn't have much re-training to do!

 
I do have a deaf dog and I trained that dog in silence.  I did this so I focus on the precision of the hand signal and to put myself in the same position as the dog...no sounds.  With the other dogs I do both, now.

ORIGINAL: ron2

The clicker and treats disappears! Once the dog is trained to your liking, then live your life with the dog and have fun and share life experiences together

Yes but some people speak of clicker training as the be all, end all with a devoutness usually reserved for the cultish followers of CM and there's got to be some goodness in using it.

I know, those fanatical Cerareenies who believe their way is the only way and run around telling others that operant conditioning has no use at all and the clicker was invented by the devil. []

Operant conditioning is just the training portion of working and living with a dog. Clicker training is just one tool in the toolbox which can be used in operant conditioning. Just one tool.

I'm certain the fanaticism mentioned in the article refers mostly to the extremist trainers. Most (not all) regular dog owners do not take it to this level and use a balanced philosophy which is more realistic and practical. Or switch to the balance, when they start running into behavior problems which the clicker can't fix all by itself. Some folks have pretty easy going dogs to begin with and need little more than NILIF. Some don't make the switch and either minimize and live with their dogs problems or become convinced there is something wrong with their dog.

It really is an individual choice all the way around. There is no "only" way, from what I've experienced.

It's difficult to see someone struggling with their dog when the clicker training has done all it can, the dog has hit the "terrible twos" and all that gets recommended on most dog boards, is more clicker training instead of another approach or finding a trainer who uses balanced training incorporated with social and behavioral philosophies.

Go read through some dog boards. Woe to anyone who dares to offer another aproach from a social and/or behavioral angle such as CM's basic philosophies, if the clicker is not solving the problem on many click-and-treat boards.

Just mentioning Cesar's name will often start a total bash fest, or WWIII if someone who has found CM philosophies useful even dares to mention his name.

Now, maybe I shouldn't mention this...but, this is the CM discussion area, isn't it? []

I was thinking of naming my future male dog either Pavlov or Skinner.

Which has a nicer ring to it?[]

ORIGINAL: chewbecca

I was thinking of naming my future male dog either Pavlov or Skinner.

Which has a nicer ring to it?[]

Definately Skinner! I think I personally wouldn't want to name my dog Pavlov after someone who tortured a lot of dogs in the name of research, though!  []

But someone who tortured rats that's OK.... cos we don't like rats right? []
 
Skinner sounds too mean.  Call him Mort.  Sorry, OT.  As you were....

ORIGINAL: Angelique

ORIGINAL: chewbecca

I was thinking of naming my future male dog either Pavlov or Skinner.

Which has a nicer ring to it?[]

Definately Skinner! I think I personally wouldn't want to name my dog Pavlov after someone who tortured a lot of dogs in the name of research, though! []

I didn't realize he actually tortured dogs, oops!
And I thought Watson was the one who tortured the rats, not Skinner, I could be wrong.

I'm pretty sure Skinner did the rats in boxes thing.  They pressed a lever to get a pellet of food.  Other times they pressed a lever to stop the electric shocks coming through the floor.  I think.  I do get the scientists mixed up sometimes.

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

I'm pretty sure Skinner did the rats in boxes thing. They pressed a lever to get a pellet of food. Other times they pressed a lever to stop the electric shocks coming through the floor. I think. I do get the scientists mixed up sometimes.

Me, too! I could have sworn that was Watson that did all that!
Dammit, now I'll have to look back in my books and HOPE that I can find the answer.
I SHOULD know this since we studied it in my intro to psych class last semester, my child growth and development, and Lifespan Developmental psych classes this semester.
This should be fresh in my mind...and it's not.

There were (and are) a lot of people who do some pretty harsh stuff to animals in the name of science. You sort of have to do your own cost/benefit analysis there and come up with your own conclusion, but it certainly wasn't just one guy, nor was it just something that happened in the past and doesn't happen any more.
 
I certainly don't think though that a scientific discovery should be discounted purely on the basis of how the researchers treated animals. Because if you start doing that, you pretty much are left with living in a shack in the woods with no hygeine products, no medicine, and no knowledge about what is and is not good for you health-wise, and definately no knoweldge of how the mammalian mind is organized, develops, thinks or learns.

I just hope that what is being done to animals for our benefit can be forgiven by the high power we look up to, or pray to.

  All dogs go to heaven.

Believe it or not that is what went through my head when I read your post. 

Hopefully that is not a biblical quote.

[sm=lol.gif]

ORIGINAL: snownose

I just hope that what is being done to animals for our benefit can be forgiven by the high power we look up to, or pray to.

No, not a biblical quote, my own statement.
 
I meant it as animals in general that go through pain and suffering for our benefit.
 
I didn't think it was funny.

The biblical quote was in reference to my "all dogs go to heaven".

It had absolutely nothing to do with your words.

Sorry that you took it to mean so.

ORIGINAL: snownose

No, not a biblical quote, my own statement.

I meant it as animals in general that go through pain and suffering for our benefit.

I didn't think it was funny.