As soon as there is something you can have strong opinions about – preferably mixed with values, their own ethics and morals, so a corridor of opinion is often created when there are several individuals who have the same opinion, values and so on. This thing with dogs is such a thing.
One of the things what happens when you deal with corridors of opinion is that everyone who is in the same cheerleader cheers and supports each other and solidifies this idea to sometimes absurd proportions. Good examples of that are – again the dog world (which we all know contains at least two of these corridors), but also the Sweden Democrats, certain religious orientations (and I'm not talking about Islam, but actually Swedish, Christian orientations), other policies… there, the list can probably be made endless if you have the energy to devote yourself to it, which I don't do at the moment.
There are certainly those wondering why I don't allow comments here on the blog – has it to do with the said opinion corridor?
Actually not. 🙂
It has only to do with spam, and that I really can't stand sorting and throwing away spam comments all at once. Even though I have security measures, it still gets spam, and it is among the worst I know. So no comments.
Do you have opinions, no matter what kind, you can of course leave them on Facebook or Twitter, where I share my posts. The only thing I expect is that you keep a good tone and that the communication makes sense.
…
Do you remember that I told (a while ago) that I received a postcard with praise and encouragement for standing up for my opinions in a world where everyone's opinions should be as balanced as possible? Or, I don't remember if I wrote that that was exactly what it said (approximately), but so it was.
For a couple days ago I received a letter from the same person. No signature – the person wishes to remain anonymous, and therefore chooses to write a completely ordinary one, old fashioned letter on paper, without signing. Of course it's going well, that with.
What I think is worth mentioning in this letter is that the person in question writes at the end that he does not always agree with me, but rather think just the opposite. And if it didn't appear – you really don't have to think, think or do like me. My goal with this blog is to highlight other perspectives than just positive reinforcement and show that there are other ways of thinking, think and do – and it doesn't have to be wrong. It's just different from positive reinforcement which is just such a corridor of opinion that has almost become a cult.
To continue about why it is worth bringing this up; it's not common for a person who has opinions that are the complete opposite of how I think to actually be capable of having a meaningful conversation, or able to communicate in a way that is constructive. It is one of the rare precisely because people of different opinions than me are often emotionally involved and take my way of thinking as a personal insult.
So when it a person appears who is able to communicate about this in a way that shows that he is ok with what you think, think and act differently – then I'll be impressed.
In my experience is it the case that it is difficult to meaningfully communicate and discuss with people who have this extreme emotional involvement. They are, in my experience, self-righteous and self-righteous and it is not unusual to hear/read “I would aaaaaldrig do that to my dog”, as if to tell the outside world what a fantastic person they really are aaaaaldrig would do this or that, because it is so terribly mean.
To talk to a person with that attitude is making himself the culprit in the drama without even knowing it. You don't want to do exactly what they think, then you are a malicious person who mistreats your dog badly, probably should be charged with a ban on animals, pay huge fines, maybe even go to jail for animal cruelty.
In other words, you see how absurd it gets.
There actually is several ways to be with dogs. Even the majority of the dog trainers I follow say so; Cesar Milan, Robert Cabral, Larry Krohn, Will Atherton – and the majority to. I've heard them all say “my way is not the only one – but it works”.
It is, however nothing I've ever heard said by anyone devoted exclusively to positive reinforcement. Just sayin’.
So – to you who wrote both postcards and letters to me – thanks for showing that there is the occasional person out there who doesn't always agree with me, but who can still communicate in a meaningful way. I appreciate it. 🙂
…
And just for that after all it is my blog and I can write what I want, I just want to finish by clarifying my attitude towards positive reinforcement.
Positive reinforcement is a great one – Really great tool, when you want to teach your dog a specific task, as his, lie, stay, do si, do so – and so on. I myself use positive reinforcement when I have to teach Boyo something new, or when I need to encourage him in tasks he finds a little strange, slightly creepy or unpleasant.
However, it is the one tool. Not that end the tool. I have several tools in my toolbox, and positive reinforcement is what I use the least. Not because it's bad, but because it is not particularly interesting to me to any great extent. I've said it before and I'll say it again; I am more interested in a more natural communication that the dog understands naturally.
I am not rather interested in positive reinforcement as a life philosophy in terms of how I interact with dogs. For me, positive reinforcement used in excess becomes a way of constantly lying to the dog, and in my experience you can't lie to a dog. For that reason, it is more important for me to be able to communicate openly and honestly with body language, facial expressions, eyes and so on. It is a completely different approach, and I am aware of it. Not everyone has to think, think or do like me.