Dogs are a sub species of wolves (Canis lupus familiaris)
Although they can interbreed their DNA is not identical

Like the bonobo and the common chimp
they are both the same species

However their behaviours are totally different

Very strange analogy there Hans..... If someone since Newton came along and disproved his theories, then we wouldn't even know who Newton was nowadays.

I'm also puzzled as to why you think may have said the picture was taken in 1970. I didn't. I referred to the references at the foot of the article you posted, their key reference to all the information in the article was taken from a book published in the 70s. Outdated information.

I've no idea why you're playing games here. But if you want to play and distort and twist, then bring it on.

At the end of it all, Dogs are Not Wolves.... QED.... and really the rest is just hot air. So let's get to what you really want to say. Or are you just poking the cage to see if anything squeaks?

Originally Posted by Prager Hans View Post
So let me make this clear.
1. Some of You guys are saying all positive is good and all negative is bad.

No, positive punishment is pretty cruel. Negative reward can be used sometimes but I prefer to try and use positive reward
Positive punishment is probably cruel because you have not seen it done properly.

2. The wolves do not dominate others within the pack. They are just mom and dad and their little children and they live in harmony without rules of pack's hierarchy.))

All families have rules and personalities but the younger wolves are not trying to raise their status so they can be the alpha one day - if they stayed in the pack that would mean that they would breed with their parents or a sibling
ALL the cubs will one day leave the pack and form their own pack - even the most picked upon wolf who shows the most apeasing gestures to the others in the pack.

That is interesting you disagreeing with me by agreeing with me using different words then I do.


3. Old trainers like Most and Koehler trained with negative only approach.

No answer here?
4. All violence is bad.

YES! in terms of humans with animals. What happens in the wild is totaly different than what happens with our domestic animals.
So if I get attacked by a vicious dog I should not be violent and offer him cookie.
5. Dog responds to you only because he/she loves you.

Nope. Dogs respond for many reasons. For thousands of years we have bred from the dogs who most wanted to work with humans, they also learn because of the consequences of their actions - if something good happens then the want to do the thing more, if something bad happens they want to do it less
what the dog decides is good or bad is up to the dog - a smile may be enough for some dogs, and a sharp word may be a big punishment to some dogs
That is exactly what I am saying.

6.If you apply properly positive x Negative reinforcement that is harsh and thus you are cruel mean person.
If you choose to apply harsh training when you know there is alternatives then yes that is cruel
Even using positive punishment it does not have to be harsh
I agree with this. But you contradicting yourself> Above you have said that "positive punishment is pretty cruel":

7. If you apply any kind of negative on a dog that he will learn that and becomes aggressive. On the other hand if you apply just positive then he will always be little angel.

Of course not. In some situations, like punishing fear agression you could cause aggression to get worse
In general rewarding a dog makes them more confident, makes them try new things and helps them develop their brains making them smarter
Punishment supresses behaviour making dogs less likely to try new things, makes them less confident and does not work their brains
8. And yes you dog is perfect and will never disobey and you are perfect and will never drop the leash by mistake since you know that it is against the law.

Nothing is foolproof - punishments are not 100% either - if the reward of chasing the furry is greater than the punishment you inflict then the dog will chase the furry
In (horrible) experiments on rats they had them on one side of a cage with an electrified piece of floor in the middle

In one group they put food on the other side of the floor
The rats of course tried to get to the food and got electrocuted
and so they starved to death on their own side of the cage

another group they got hooked on ratty drugs and put their drugs on the other side of the cage
the junkie rats got shocked the same as the foodie rats
but their desire for the drugs was greater and so they walked across the floor
chasing is an addiction

I know that this is a partial answer beacuse this is abig topic. But do not forget that you can also get aggression by applying positive reinforcement. As a matter of fact that is most common cause of unwanted aggression in dogs.
9. Proper training which applies 100% positive and no negative is all what is ever needed.
No answer here

Does that sums it up?
Prage Hans

I know that this is a partial answer beacuse this is abig topic. But do not forget that you can also get aggression by applying positive reinforcement. As a matter of fact that is most common cause of unwanted aggression in dogs.

Can you substantiate that statement please.

Thanks.

rune

You are wrong BONOBO is Pan paniscus and great common chimp is Pan troglodytes. Any child knows that. Two different species.

Wolf x Dog 2 different subspecies

Bonobo x Great chimp 2 same genus but different species. Go and study some on taxonomic ranks
Prager Hans

the answer to 9 was at the end of the post as this one is because I have to have something outside the quote box else the reply is too short
But again it is possible for a trainer to attempt to only use positive reinforcments in training
negative punishment can be fair and effective in some situations but I see it as a challange to try and apply no punishments

can i play?(i like these pics lol)

Then why the feck are you foisting wolf studies on us when you acknowledge that primate studies have no bearing on human behaviour?

Hans - come on, stop playing.
Either you are waaay above us in academia, or you're just poking fun, or not up to date with stuff. Which is it? Anything else is just being unfair... to all involved in this discussion.

All right . But then I am done here.

This is a very common situation. Handler/owner of the dog/pup walks on the street. Dog/Pup see another dog/ person or such and starts to bark. Owner applies positive reinforcement and starts "calming" the pup/dog down by petting him and with soothing voice is saying something like this:" Do not bark on a doggie ,.. he is a good doggie, don't bark on him.It's OK ......" This is being said usually together with soothing petting of the offending dog.
Now understand that positive reinforcement adds on the behavior and negative subtracts. Thus the dog reads your soothing as encouragement. What is worse, is that this miscommunication escalates to the point where dogs will be aggressive at the source of his aggression further and further away. Also the owner when he/she encounters such situation is going to be worry more and more. Thus dog then hinks that the owner is afraid of the other dog or person or such and this then leads to further escalation of serious aggression.
This a very common case of use of positive reinforcement used improperly. Thus when we train a dog we must brake down everything to the lowest common denominator and that is often not easy.
Prager Hans

I did not say that chimp studies have no bearing on human behavior.
I have said that Pigmy chimp and Greater Chimp are of same Genus,
where wolf and dog are of same species.
Prager Hans