{"id":36367,"date":"2024-02-04T02:44:00","date_gmt":"2024-02-04T02:44:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/?p=36367"},"modified":"2024-02-05T18:12:16","modified_gmt":"2024-02-05T18:12:16","slug":"training-an-animal-an-ethicist-explains-how-and-why-your-dog-%e2%88%92-but-not-your-frog-%e2%88%92-can-be-punished","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/training-an-animal-an-ethicist-explains-how-and-why-your-dog-%e2%88%92-but-not-your-frog-%e2%88%92-can-be-punished\/","title":{"rendered":"Training an animal? An ethicist explains how and why your dog \u2212 but not your frog \u2212 can be\u00a0punished"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Jon Garthoff<\/a>, University of Tennessee<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

People talk to their pets every day: offering praise when they\u2019re good, reassurance when they\u2019re confused and affection when they\u2019re cuddling. We also speak to animals when they misbehave. \u201cWhy did you do that?\u201d someone might ask their dog. Or we might scold the cat \u2013 \u201cDon\u2019t touch that!\u201d \u2013 as we move a family heirloom across the room.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But is it ever appropriate to punish or rebuke an animal<\/a>?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When people talk about \u201cpunishment,\u201d this implies more than a loss of privileges. The term suggests someone is being asked to learn a lesson<\/a> after breaking a rule they can understand. But an animal\u2019s understanding is different from a human\u2019s, which raises questions about what lessons they can learn and what, if any, rebukes of animals are ethical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These issues involve what researchers know about different animals\u2019 cognition. But they also go beyond this by raising questions about what kind of moral standing animals have<\/a> and how people who interact with animals should train them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As an ethical theorist<\/a>, I\u2019ve explored these and related questions<\/a>, including with some of my colleagues in psychology<\/a> and anthropology. I would argue it is important to distinguish three types of learning: conditioning, instruction and education.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conditioning<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

One type of learning, called \u201cclassical conditioning,\u201d was popularized by the psychologist Ivan Pavlov<\/a> just after the turn of the 20th century. By repeatedly ringing a bell while presenting food, Pavlov famously induced dogs to salivate from the bell ring alone. Such learning proceeds merely from associating two types of stimuli: a sound and a snack, in this case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When scientists talk about punishment, they normally mean \u201coperant conditioning,\u201d which was popularized by the psychologists Edward Thorndike<\/a> and B. F. Skinner<\/a> shortly thereafter. In operant conditioning, positive or pleasurable stimuli are used to reinforce desired behavior, and negative or painful stimuli are used to deter undesired behavior. We may give a dog a treat, for example, to reward it for following a command to sit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A<\/a>
Reward for a job well done. Sol de Zuasnabar Brebbia\/Moment via Getty Images<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The kind of learning that operant conditioning aims to achieve, however, lacks a crucial ingredient of human punishment: responsibility. When people punish<\/a>, it is not just to discourage an undesired behavior. They are trying to drive home that someone has transgressed<\/a> \u2013 that the individual\u2019s behavior merits punishment<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But can nonhuman animals transgress? Do they ever deserve rebuke? I would argue they do \u2013 but with key differences from human wrongdoing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Instruction<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Training for many animals, such as horses and dogs, goes beyond conditioning. It involves a more sophisticated kind of learning: instruction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One important way instruction differs from conditioning is that an instructor addresses their trainee. Pet owners and animal trainers speak to cats and dogs, and though these animals have no knowledge of grammar, they can understand what many human words refer to<\/a>. Caretakers also often listen to their animals\u2019 vocalizations in an attempt to understand their meaning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To be sure, people condition cats and dogs \u2013 consider spraying a cat with water when it nibbles on a houseplant. The goal is for the cat to associate an off-limits snack with an unpleasant experience, and so to leave the plant alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But training pets can go beyond changing their behavior. It can aim to improve animals\u2019 ability to reason about what to do<\/a>: a trainer teaches a dog how to navigate an agility course, for example, or how to get through a new pet door. Instruction involves understanding, whereas learning based on mere conditioning does not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A<\/a>
Don\u2019t do it. Yuliia Kokosha\/Moment via Getty Images<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

An animal\u2019s ability to be instructed stems from the nature of their mental life. Scientists do not know exactly which animals\u2019 cognition involves understanding<\/a>, genuine problem-solving and the ability to reason or infer<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But research on perception<\/a> \u2013 on how humans and other animals convert sensory information<\/a> into mental representations of physical objects<\/a> \u2013 has helped philosophers and psychologists distinguish thought from more basic mental capacities such as vision and hearing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is extremely likely that some nonhuman animals \u2013 including dolphins, apes and elephants \u2013 do think, as philosopher Gary Varner<\/a> argued in the 2012 book \u201cPersonhood, Ethics, and Animal Cognition<\/a>.\u201d My research suggests the distinction between thinking and nonthinking animals tracks well with the distinction<\/a> between animals that can be instructed and those that can, at most, be conditioned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This difference is crucial to how different pets should be treated. An owner should have concern for their pet frog<\/a>, of course, and care for its needs<\/a>. But they do not need to recognize the frog the same way they should recognize a dog: by addressing it, listening to it and comforting it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Though an owner may rebuke the dog to hold it responsible for its actions, they must also hold themselves responsible to the animal, including by considering how the pet has interpreted events.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Education<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Some nonhuman animals have demonstrated impressive cognitive abilities<\/a> in experimental settings, such as recognizing their bodies in mirrors and recalling past experiences<\/a>. Some birds, for example, display sensitivity to details about food they have cached, such as its perishability and how long ago it was stored.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Still, scientists do not possess strong evidence<\/a> that animals have critical thinking abilities<\/a> or a concept of self<\/a>, the key requirements for genuine education. Unlike conditioning and instruction, education aims to enable a learner to explain the world, to evaluate and debate rationales for decisions. It also prepares people to ask \u2013 and to try to answer \u2013 ethical questions like, \u201cHow should I live\u201d and \u201cWas that action justified?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A<\/a>
Learning not just what not to do but why. FatCamera\/E+ via Getty Images<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

A cat or dog cannot pose these questions. Much of the time, human beings do not concern themselves with these questions, either \u2013 but they can. In fact, caretakers pay great attention to these matters during child-rearing, as when they ask children, \u201cHow would you like it if someone did that to you\u201d or \u201cDo you really think it\u2019s OK to act that way?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Assuming that animals do not reflect and criticize, and therefore are not capable of education, I would say that they have no moral obligations<\/a>. It is fair to say a pet has transgressed, since animals such as dogs and cats can come to understand how to act better. But morally speaking, an animal cannot commit wrongdoing<\/a>, for it lacks a conscience: It may understand some of its behavior, but not its own mind.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In my view, addressing an animal and acting with an understanding of how it interprets events is central to the ethical training of pets. But if someone treats an animal as though it were responsible for justifying itself to us, as though it could offer excuses and apologies, they anthropomorphize the animal and ask too much of it. Pet owners often do this in a mock way, saying things like, \u201cNow you know you shouldn\u2019t have done that\u201d \u2013 the same phrases they might use with a child.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unlike a child, however, the animal\u2019s transgression is not a failure to fulfill a moral obligation. In human relationships we aspire to relations of mutual justification, where reasons are exchanged and excuses and apologies evaluated. But that\u2019s not the nature of our relationships with our pets \u2013 however tempted we may be to think otherwise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jon Garthoff<\/a>, Professor of Philosophy, University of Tennessee<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This article is republished from The Conversation<\/a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jon Garthoff, University of Tennessee People talk to their pets every day: offering praise when they\u2019re good, reassurance when they\u2019re confused and affection when they\u2019re cuddling. We also speak to animals when they misbehave. \u201cWhy did you do that?\u201d someone might ask their dog. Or we might scold the cat \u2013 \u201cDon\u2019t touch that!\u201d \u2013 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":36368,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[118,3410],"tags":[4760,175,4838,4756,4248,196,4249,3075,3105,457],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36367"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=36367"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36367\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":36378,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36367\/revisions\/36378"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/36368"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36367"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=36367"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=36367"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}