3 ms·
That the dog was doing what a dog is instinctually likely to do, depending on their temperament. This would be a failing of human training, because human traini
by borski 5y ago
That the dog was doing what a dog is instinctually likely to do, depending on their temperament. This would be a failing of human training, because human training is intended to replace some instincts with learned behaviors, since dogs have such a 'people pleasing' mindset when trained with compassion and positive reinforcement.
I'm not sure what your point was. Their dog doesn't share their ethics, nor should they be expected to. I would not expect a dog to 'de-escalate' a situation with another very angry dog, despite expecting humans to try and do that when faced with another very angry human.
- summm 5y agoIf a dog has a violent temperament, training is nice but eventually irrelevant. It should just never be kept in a neighborhood where humans live, or where it has any chance of coming close to any human. Instead it should be kept in a fenced area. And it should never breed. Or maybe even put down.
- borski 5y agoDogs with “violent temperaments” often get that way solely from abuse. In such cases, training absolutely helps, as does unconditional love. I have seen it multiple times, anecdotally.
- moralestapia 5y ago>I'm not sure what your point was. My point is that you DO have a part on what your dog is doing, you cannot just let a pet behave like a feral animal. Hence the argument of "this is what the dog feels like doing" is dull.
- borski 5y agoDogs won’t, by and large, attack your neighbor’s leg by default, unless they are provoked or have previously been abused. Nobody is advocating for letting them act like a feral animal. But just as you teach your kids to have manners, we teach our animals to have them too.
- moralestapia 5y ago>My point is that you DO have a part on what your dog is doing Thanks for supporting my argument