I've spent a couple of days trying to track down a video with Zak George (which I really don't like), where he apparently said “I use aversive control” regarding a dog he has at home right now. Don't know if the dog is his own, or someone he took it upon himself to train. Såvitt jag förstår det, är det en blandning mellan Malinois och Schäfer.
Efter mycket om och men hittade jag videon där Zak George säger just detta – den finns att se på Instagram, om man är intresserad. Medan jag å ena sidan var mindre imponerad av hans uttalande än jag trodde, så tycker jag ändå att han gjorde rätt bra ifrån sig när han sade att man måste göra skillnad på hantering (management) och träning. Det har han nämligen en poäng i.
Skummade några av de översta kommentarerna till den här videon, och det är därför jag skriver det här inlägget.
One of them biggest differences between those who engage in positive reinforcement as a lifestyle when it comes to dogs, and people like me, who think that positive reinforcement can be a good tool, men – actually just ONE tool, is how important this thing with dog training is. Not to mention what you expect the dog to learn to understand, about how people work and what is feasible in our world.
People think linear. We have a plan. We post milestones, and expect to achieve them, or possibly get a setback and start over.
Dogs don't think so. Dogs work in a completely different way. They live in the here and now in a way that most of us can only dream of. They deal with what is in front of them, here and now, and shit on what happened ten seconds ago, and that which (they don't know) will happen in ten seconds, ten minutes, or maybe even a month or a year. They have no plan, they have no milestones.
Bara is.
And I believe that this is where clashes occur between those who think that positive reinforcement is God's greatest gift to dogs, and those who don't think so.
I do not say that dogs cannot learn things. I'm also not saying you shouldn't learn them. I also never said positive reinforcement is bad – just that it is not the only tool, and that from my perspective it is naive to see it as the only tool.
What I, however have very strong opinions about, is how so many people seem to miss that regardless of whether you engage in training or other communication with your dog, so there is a constant exchange of energy, a constant reading of body language, mimicry and so on. It's like there's no getting away from it. And unlike many others, so I believe that it is precisely that communication that is most effective, if you want to have a good relationship with your dog.
In such a communication includes showing negative emotions, for both dogs and humans. How else are you supposed to learn boundaries? It's about respect for your partner, which in this case is one's dog. But instead we refuse to teach ourselves and instead force our dogs to learn a lot of unnatural behaviors. In my world, that is extremely disrespectful.
And I will be actually quite sad when I see individuals such as Zak George with the reach he has in social media, who claim to be good at training dogs, but doesn't know a shit about dog language at a level that corresponds to other skills. I find it unpleasant, and totally inappropriate.
With that said; at least now i've seen this video where zak george admits to using aversive control on a dog, and that every dog trainer he knows has been allowed to do it at one point or another.
Now thinking at least I put this aside, and return to communicating with my own dog in our way.