Independent Thinking - CM revisited

Actually, JM, the thread was intended as the one place where opponents of these methods could expressly state why they don't care for them, or use them.  There is no tolerance for dissent on the CM threads, so no one gets the other side of the issue.  But, the Cesareenies (their term, not mine) came quickly to do on this thread what they want to prevent people like me from doing on their section.  It was posted on the clicker section because I assume that most people who use clicker training correctly are not using CM-similar techniques very much, and because we have no exclusive section for positive training, nor do I think exclusive sections are that good an idea.  I lobbied for the clicker section only AFTER it became apparent that there was no section devoted primarily to dog-friendly methods, but there was a section devoted to what I consider techniques based on an outdated dominance theory that doesn't really fit the large majority of pet dogs anyway. 
Others spout quite a bit about "not all methods work for all dogs", and that is true.  However, when did we get to think that all methods should not be humane and result in the consequences we intended.  We need not cause pain or increase (here's the big one, folks) confusion in the dog in order to train.  If your methodology is doing either, you are not benefiting the animal.  Whether you like it or not, there is an "us" or "them" on some aspects of what's ok to do to dogs, and I like it that way.  The "us" in my case is people who learn the science behind how dogs learn and try to find appropriate and humane ways to teach them what we need them to know to live within a human-dominated society.  The "them", to me, are those who use aversives before they try (and I mean in a methodical and educated way) positives, and who rely on a model that is outdated, or has been superceded by more recent research.  Here's just one example.  It used to be that people were told that if they let their puppies sleep on the bed, the pups would grow up to think that they were in charge, and "dominant" over the family.  Recent research has shown that there is only a small window of time when that matters - in the first two months of life.  So, since most people don't get puppies until they are 8 weeks old (we hope), that little "rule" seems to be outdated.  My question is what else are we taking as fact that is really fiction?  IMHO, all of us should be asking that of ourselves all the time, stay updated on recent research and techniques, discuss what has worked, or not worked for us, but stay away from the blind adoration of any one method or individual.  As an example, when one of the forum members mentions a new book or tape, I go check it out.  If it's in my budget, I try to get a copy - if not, I try to get my library to grab it for me.  But, I read everything I can get my hands on.  I did not set about to criticize CM until I had seen quite a few episodes and read the book.  I wonder how many of "them" have read Kay Laurence or watched Kathy Sdao's tapes, or bought Karen Pryor's clicker kit and really tried it.  I hope they have, because that is the only basis for true comparison.  If someone can make intelligent criticism, I'm always listening.  But, I detest the "smoke and mirrors" of vague language and unsubstantiated data. [sm=2cents.gif]  Debate is great.  Don't be so quick to censor, and you may learn.

Espence, in the picture you took with CM, is he wearing a cape?  Because you certainly act like he is.

"....those who view their dogs as displaced wild animals see themselves locked in battle with their pets, struggling to stay one step ahead of, and be top dog over a canine eager to topple them the instant they let down their guard. ...
 
Don't think owners who use this approach dislike their pets; they do enjoy them, but they derive much of their enjoyment of the interaction from their ability to dominate the animals."
 
Myra M Milani, D.V. M.
 
I think much of CM's protocol is simply giving permission for some people to do what they'd do anyway. And, with permission granted, it increases in intensity.

Here's just one example. It used to be that people were told that if they let their puppies sleep on the bed, the pups would grow up to think that they were in charge, and "dominant" over the family. Recent research has shown that there is only a small window of time when that matters - in the first two months of life.

 
Do you have a source for this? I'm of the bed sleeping camp, (because it is so cuddly) and I'd like something a little more scientific than "I'm still waiting" when people say it causes dominance and aggression in dogs.

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

...Others spout quite a bit about "not all methods work for all dogs", and that is true.

 
If that is all that is learned from this thread then that is enough for today.  That is progress in my view.
 
I must also say that the protectiveness and defensiveness that is described within the CM category also exist within the Clicker category.  I have been harping on two concerns I have with Clicker training a hound and an emaciated dog.  I have been ignored by the Clicker experts here.  I have sent Karen Pryor and a few lessor knowns a message addressing my concern and got no reply.  The only reply I received is from my Clicker instructor who stated he does not know for sure and could not give me a satisfactory answer. 
 
Again, as I previous stated.  If you are a dog professional and your preference is one method and you like it, continue to practice and learn more and more.  Talk it up.  I suggest that bashing of other methods to promote the prefer method doesn't work for JQP and I am proof of that.
 
 

ORIGINAL: DPU

I suggest that bashing of other methods to promote the prefer method doesn't work for JQP and I am proof of that.

 
[sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif]

I am probably going to hell for saying this...but to me there is a difference between a dog and  a dog.

One being 7 pounds, another being 70 pounds.

Of course it is easy for me to intimidate the 7 pound pom.  Not so with the 70 pound Zeus.

ETA..I forget what what my point was (I'm old)

Seems to me that the "us vs them" is about belief system and a methodology, not just methods. Most of the more current posters here use all kinds of methods, which can be fine and work well. What started this post is not so much about various methods but about differing belief systems and methodologies.
 
I think the clicker vs CM stuff  (debated here and in many other places) is based more on beliefs--which entail far more than just methods--than just methods.

ORIGINAL: nfowler
Seems to me that the "us vs them" is about belief system and a methodology, not just methods. Most of the more current posters here use all kinds of methods, which can be fine and work well. What started this post is not so much about various methods but about differing belief systems and methodologies.

^ Great post! I suspect you are right. (I also appreciated denise m's post on bickering history.)

What do you think are the real differences that are dividing people?

Let's say that we all agree that we have a responsibility to do our best for the dogs we interact with ... from there, what are the points of difference? What core beliefs lay underneath all the clickers and quadrants and collars and crates?

From Denise M post, I surmised that the resolve did not come from the opposing believers.  It came from a much larger group that listened and developed individual compromises.  Some took the time to learn and practice correctly how to raw feed, while others continued to stay with kibble.  But I am sure through the discussion and learning, the beliefs were blended (veggies added) and the dog benefited.  What happened to hard core believers....probably isolation was their fate.  

Ixas_girl, by their very nature, beliefs are exclusive.  I advocate separate ra ra groups and you invite separate believers to identify their difference, together.  A sure forumula for sparks as we have seen time and time again.  It is only those that can objectively look at the multiple beliefs and apply them to their personal situation and experience that would be best to discuss.  That I think is what happened in the first 4 and half pages of this thread and why it was civil.

What do you think are the real differences that are dividing people?

I think some people are more concerned about how they appear to their dog than their actual relationship with their dog. I think some people are actually stuck in the never-ending (to them) battle ot make sure they are dominant rather than enjoying the companionship of their animal. I think some people are so concerned about what others think that they cannot make a sane decision for theirselves. I think some people are so enamoured with any direction at all in life, that they think a bad direction is better than no direction at all. I think some people search for ways to find that their dog is challenging them rather than just enjoying what their dog is offering and trying to communicate with them. I think some people try to find some deeper meaning to everything when there isn't one.


I think some people should stop thinking so much, and get off the computer and train!!

ORIGINAL: dobedvm

I think some people are more concerned about how they appear to their dog than their actual relationship with their dog. I think some people are actually stuck in the never-ending (to them) battle ot make sure they are dominant rather than enjoying the companionship of their animal. I think some people are so concerned about what others think that they cannot make a sane decision for theirselves. I think some people are so enamoured with any direction at all in life, that they think a bad direction is better than no direction at all. I think some people search for ways to find that their dog is challenging them rather than just enjoying what their dog is offering and trying to communicate with them. I think some people try to find some deeper meaning to everything when there isn't one.

I think some people should stop thinking so much, and get off the computer and train!!

[sm=huh.gif]

Who owns dogs if not to have fun with? who does not enjoy their company? if those people you are talking about are going to be that stressed out all the time then why they had a dog in first place? a dog should help you to relax, not the opposite, those people are wrong indeed, its all about the dog, not them or what the people could think

Ah misconceptions, misconceptions, misconceptions [8D]

I think the clicker vs CM stuff (debated here and in many other places) is based more on beliefs--which entail far more than just methods--than just methods.

 
I definately agree with this. My father was harsh with dogs and children. One of my rebellions is treating them very differently and getting far better results. I think the dogs are happier with this idea too.

ORIGINAL: Stacita

Here's just one example. It used to be that people were told that if they let their puppies sleep on the bed, the pups would grow up to think that they were in charge, and "dominant" over the family. Recent research has shown that there is only a small window of time when that matters - in the first two months of life.

Do you have a source for this? I'm of the bed sleeping camp, (because it is so cuddly) and I'd like something a little more scientific than "I'm still waiting" when people say it causes dominance and aggression in dogs.

I had the source before my old computer crashed. []  I Googled around, but can't seem to locate it again.  I wonder if it's cited in Lindsay's text.  If I come across it, I'll PM you. The point of the article was that the sleeping arrangements didn't seem to be the cause of dominant or aggressive behavior, except when the pup was allowed in bed during the first two months of life.  Obviously, that would suggest that any dominance related behavior the dog exhibits is due to other factors.

Thanks. I'd like it if you run across it again. I've been told over and over not to let the dogs sleep in the bed (and ignored it). An actual study would be nice.