The Bird Sound

Humans are the loudest animals I know. Our verbal communication has too many noise. This noise originates a number of unusual characteristics, adapted more and more to the social requirements as I wrote in this article.

In the article in which I made the presentation of this project, I mentioned that I have always been a person of few words, perhaps that is why I am so observant and it is in the silence and natural sounds that I find peace.

I have always used my innate characteristics in animal training, especially in silence and observation. Over the years, I have been proving on a daily basis that science is increasingly demonstrating the efficacy of correct use of sounds in interspecific communication. Before that, I had the experience of “speaking” only when strictly and if really necessary. The result can not be better. The fluidity of communication is outstanding.

Sounds above the desired for the situation which may even have an inhibitory function, may not be effective. Animals do not follow our “ego warnings”(which I consider frustrations) and associations do not follow our “human demand standard”. Everything is simple if we make the effort to simplify.

All this learning and experience over the years has been accumulating in external environments with their natural sounds. I usually trained in gardens or forests with dogs and their owners, where the abundance of birds and their characteristic communication was our background. I also noticed that the higher sounds of the owners with the dogs made the communication more difficult, besides disturbing the environment.

Thus, I adopted the “Bird Sound” Principle. This principle is based on: “Any human sound produced and repeated beyond what is desired in a particular moment that smother the natural background sounds and does not produce any desireable behavior of the other species, means that such communication has a natural barrier which must be solve by silence.”

In this way, I always recommend to all participants that in order to communicate they do not have to yell, they should only use the sound in a appropriate volume to the situation in question. In doubt, do not speak.

From today, pay attention to the natural environment sound around you and respect it. Good communication!

The result can be seen in the “Teach without Speech” Presentation Video and in the following videos.











This article would be published in a book for commercial purposes. But we want to reach out more professionals and families with updated and real information, so the content is being released for free. If you believe in this project, make a voluntary contribution of your choice and we can continue with the free publications. If you are a company and want to take an active part in this project, contact us.

References
ABRANTES, R. (1997). The Evolution of Canine Social Behavior. Wakan Tanka Publishers.

ABRANTES, R. (1997). Dog Language. Wakan Tanka.

BARATA, R. (2016). ABCD System. Etologia.pt

BARATA, R. (2016). Lead Respect. Etologia.pt

CHANCE, P. (2008) Learning and Behavior. Wadsworth-Thomson Learning, Belmont, CA, 6th, ed.

DARWIN, C. (1899). The Expressions of the Emotions in Man and Animals. New York D. Appleton and Company.

EKMAN, P. (1976). Nonverbal Communiction: Movements with Precise Meanings. Journal of Communication, 26(3),14-26.

EKMAN, P. & ROSENBERG, E. L. (2005). What the face reveals : basic and applied studies of spontaneous expression using the facial action coding system (FACS) — 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, Inc.

HOROWITZ, Alexandra. (2014). Domestic Dog, cognition and Behavior—The Scientific Study of Canis familiaris. Springer.

LORENZ, Konrad. (1981). The foundations of ethology.
Based on a translation of Vergleichende Verhaltensforschung, with revisions. Springer Science+Business Media New York.

MCCONNELL, Patricia B. 1988. “The Effect of Acoustic Features on Receiver Response in Mammalian Communication.” Dissertation: Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin–Madison.

MCFARLAND, D. (1998). Animal Behaviour. Benjamin Cummings. 3rd ed.

MIKLÓSI, Ádám. (2007). Dog Behaviour, Evolution, and Cognition. Oxford University Press.

SANNI Somppi, Heini Törnqvist, Miiamaaria V. Kujala, Laura Hänninen, Christina M. Krause, Outi Vainio. Dogs Evaluate Threatening Facial Expressions by Their Biological Validity – Evidence from Gazing Patterns. PLOS ONE, 2016; 11 (1): e0143047 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143047

SCHIRMER A, Seow CS, & Penney TB (2013). Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways. PloS one, 8 (9) PMID: 24023954

Lead Respect

Sometimes people are holding the dog leash as if protecting a million dollars . We protect more than that : The life of someone you love. So, we must have the naturalness and the genius to face the leash as a natural communication link and not as an egocentric control material. They will thank you.

For many years I have worked with many animals. The fact that I do not have a dog or a well-selected dog to demonstrate my theories, has made me adapt my techniques to a model as standard as possible, being effective with most dogs, with a variation skill as small as possible.

Its important not create bad associations with the lead. — Photo: etologia.pt and etologi.dk.

This fact made me have a great respect for the lead. Firstly because it is something that is not natural for the dog, and secondly because everything in our life that can bring us own benefit requires pressure (from pressing the button on the television control to opening a bottle of water). This self-education is a human challenge, and as such requires dedication and will.

In 1997, I was a young man who still did not think to train dogs or another species. But there was a dog named “Duck.” I remember once when walking with him on the street have used the expression: You are smiling. It was not him, it was the lead. Without tension, the lead makes an envious smile. Almost 20 years later, I recalled this expression in one of my dog ​​groups, one of the participants said.

If the lead is not being used, must be touching the floor. — Photo: etologi.dk

Now I realize that I have unconsciously always defended and trained with the trela smiling with dogs, cats or horses. Joining with all the other techniques I’ve developed over the years, the result is in the video below, from the first session I worked with an 8-month Labrador that pulls the leash and lacks focus on training. And one more video with horses.

For a better understanding of the videos, I recommend you read these my articles:
M&M System Introduction
ABCD System
Signals Precision in Animal Training









This article would be published in a book for commercial purposes. But we want to reach out more professionals and families with updated and real information, so the content is being released for free. If you believe in this project, make a voluntary contribution of your choice and we can continue with the free publications. If you are a company and want to take an active part in this project, contact us.

Signals precision in Animal Training

Animal Training should be a clear and precise interspecies communication. It’s important to respect and understand the species that we are training.

This little article will show how precise and simple signals can be effective with calm and respect with dogs.

First, some basic information.

Canine communication
– Dogs communicate majority by visual signals.
– They show a sophisticated mimics and body language.
– They are excellent observers of our body language.

Behavior
– Response to a stimulus.
– Influenced by the environment.
– Changed depending of consequences.

Learning
– The process to change behaviors.
– Nonassociative Learning.
– Associative Learning (Classical Conditioning and Operant Conditioning).

Definitions
– A Signal is everything that intentionally causes a change in the behavior of the receiver.
– A Cue is everything that unintentionally causes a change in the behavior of the receiver.
– A Command is a Signal that causes a change in the behavior of the receiver in a specific way with no variations or only extremely minor variations.

About the signals:
– A Signal has a meaning and a form.
– Good signals are effective .
– Bad signals are ineffective.
– Visual signals are better when the dog is relatively close to us; and sound signals tend to be better when the dog is far away.

In a practical way:
– SMAF – Acronym of Signal Meaning and Form.
– SMAF is a precise scientific training language created by Dr. Roger Abrantes.
– For each teaching skill and in addition to other topics we need a Plan of Action (P.O.A) with the precise signals described.

Standard Skills Example:
To simplify, I’ll write a single line with the Skill to teach => The signal meaning => The signal form.

Name(Skill) => Look at me(Meaning) => Name,sound(Form)

Sit(Skill) => Put your bottom on the ground AND keep it there until you receive another signal(Meaning) => Sit,sound + Sit,hand(Form)

Down(Skill) => Put your belly on the ground AND keep it there until you receive another signal(Meaning) => Down,sound + Down,hand(Form)

Yes(Skill) => Continue(Meaning) => Yes,sound(Form)

No(Skill) => Stop(Meaning) => No,sound(Form)

Sit and Down Skill by a young trainer

Yes-No Skill with a two and half months puppy

The importance of a simple and clear language.

Precision Signals Examples.
SMAF Manual
The 20 Principles All Animal Trainers Must Know
Animal Training — My Way







This article would be published in a book for commercial purposes. But we want to reach out more professionals and families with updated and real information, so the content is being released for free. If you believe in this project, make a voluntary contribution of your choice and we can continue with the free publications. If you are a company and want to take an active part in this project, contact us.

Animal Behavior & Communication Decoding — An introduction


Versão em Português aqui.

The moments that we have the opportunity to communicate with the animals are magical and should be Respectful. Isn’t often we have the honor to having a clear communication with another species. Having communication, we have everything. Language translates emotional states. So, it is necessary first understand to really observe. They deserve it.

In Humans, it is possible to recognize 44 units of action that are anatomically individualizable and visually distinct, that from their numerous combinations, matrices and possible conjugations, the whole complex game of the face is modeled.

Ekman and Friesen (1978) were the first scientists who have explored the Facial Action Coding System, usually called microexpressions. All this allied to the phylogenetics of behaviors.

In other species, only now some studies and researchs are advanced and its amazing how we can clarify and maybe in the future predict some behaviors.

Animal Behavior & Communication Decoding (ABCD) is a system that I design to use in my animal training sessions, trying to establish a pattern of behaviors that may predict the following behaviors. It same time, the continuous research how the body language of different species can interfering in communication and produce or conditioning some behaviors.

I’m completely sure that with a solid scientific approach in animal behavior and following all latest studies about interspecie communication, it will be possible in a near future to improve the communication, understanding and learning between different species with a precision never imagine before.

Basic Non-verbal communication diagram
Body language communication without sounds.

In 2008, I idealized an animal monitoring collar, allowing it to be used for scientific, sport, operacional and social purposes. Something impossible to do at the time. In 2014 I registered all my project. I tried without success having some support from companies that wanted to deepen this project. Seven years after I see that I was right about the future, and some international universities are engaged in similar projects, but not yet with a total essence of my project. With this collar, and a specific algorithm for this my ABCD system, speeding up for sure the whole process of research that I am doing.

My Animal Collar Project.

In this first step, I am using all the latest studies on the subject. About Facial Action Coding System (FACS), already adapted for several other species, such as chimpanzees (Vick et al., 2007), macaques (Parr et al., 2010) and gibbons (Waller et al., 2012), dogs (Waller, B.M., Peirce, K., Caeiro, C.C., Scheider, L., Burrows, A.M., McCune, S., & Kaminski, J., 2013), cats and horses.

Cat, Dog and Horse FACS. Credits in the References.

In second place, using all species ethogram available needed, as an example below.

Canine Ethogram — Roger Abrantes

This little introduction will show the standard guide of this system, that should be complemented with Specific Research Analysis (measuring behavior).

Researching Steps

Defining concepts
Research Design (RD) — All topics and planed steps for this research.
Observation Checklist (OC) — A list of procedures for the planing observation.
Species to Study (SS) — The Species that we will collect data.
Species Ethogram (SE) — List with normal Species behaviors.
Facial Action Coding System (FACS) — An anatomically based coding system for the scientific measurement of facial movements and facial expressions in humans. Can be done for all species.
Present Environment (PE) — The registration of all environment stimuli details in the moment that we can observe and couldn’t be design in RD.
Behavior One (b1) — First behavior display in one specific situation.
Behavior Error Data (BED) — All behavior variations due to the present conditions.
Behavior Antecedents Data (BAD) — All earlier antecedents that could variate the behavior displayed.
Behavior Two (b2) — The sum of b1+BED+BAD
Following Behaviors (b3, b4,…) — The sum of earliest behavior and the new behavior observed.

Standard ABCD Observation:
1. SSF (SS+SE + FACS)
2. RD
3. OC
4. PE
5. Initiate Observation
6. B1 (Registration of BED+BAD)
7. B1+PE=B2
8. B2 (Registration of BED+BAD)
9. Finish Observation
10. Follow RD

All specific and further details will be present with the progress of the studies. All scientist and animal trainers are very welcome to use this system and improve as needed. All credits for the updating will be added.







This article would be published in a book for commercial purposes. But we want to reach out more professionals and families with updated and real information, so the content is being released for free. If you believe in this project, make a voluntary contribution of your choice and we can continue with the free publications. If you are a company and want to take an active part in this project, contact us.

References
ABRANTES, R. (1997). The Evolution of Canine Social Behavior. Wakan Tanka Publishers.

ABRANTES, R. (1997). Dog Language. Wakan Tanka

ABRANTES, R. (2011). Dominance—Making Sense of the Nonsense

BEAVER, V. Bonnie (2003). Feline Behavior: A Guide For Veterinarians, Second Edition. Elsevier.

BUDIANSKY, Stephen (1997). the Nature of Horses, Their Evolution, Intelligence and Behaviour. Weidenfeld & Nicolson.

CAEIRO, C.C, Waller, B.M, Burrows, A.M. (2013). CatFACS

CHANCE, P. (2008) Learning and Behavior. Wadsworth-Thomson Learning, Belmont, CA, 6th, ed.

DARWIN, C. (1899). The Expressions of the Emotions in Man and Animals. New York D. Appleton and Company.

EKMAN, P. (1976). Nonverbal Communiction: Movements with Precise Meanings. Journal of Communication, 26(3),14-26.

EKMAN, P. & ROSENBERG, E. L. (2005). What the face reveals : basic and applied studies of spontaneous expression using the facial action coding system (FACS) — 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, Inc.

HOROWITZ, Alexandra. (2014). Domestic Dog, cognition and Behavior—The Scientific Study of Canis familiaris. Springer.

LORENZ, Konrad. (1981). The foundations of ethology.
Based on a translation of Vergleichende Verhaltensforschung, with revisions. Springer Science+Business Media New York.

MARTIN, P., Bateson, P. (2007). Measuring Behavior, An introductory guide. Cambridge University Press.

MCFARLAND, D. (1998). Animal Behaviour. Benjamin Cummings. 3rd ed.

MIKLÓSI, Ádám. (2007). Dog Behaviour, Evolution, and Cognition. Oxford University Press.

MORRIS, D. (2002). PeopleWatching. Vintage Books.

SANNI Somppi, Heini Törnqvist, Miiamaaria V. Kujala, Laura Hänninen, Christina M. Krause, Outi Vainio. Dogs Evaluate Threatening Facial Expressions by Their Biological Validity – Evidence from Gazing Patterns. PLOS ONE, 2016; 11 (1): e0143047 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143047

SCHIRMER A, Seow CS, & Penney TB (2013). Humans process dog and human facial affect in similar ways. PloS one, 8 (9) PMID: 24023954

SKINNER, B. F. (1966). The phylogeny and ontology of behavior, Science, 153,1205-1213.

STRICKLIN, W.R. (2000). ANSC 455 Applied Animal Behavior. Department of Animal and Avian Sciences.

SZÉKELY, T. (2010). Social Behaviour, Genes, Ecology and Evolution. Cambridge University Press.

WALLER, B.M, Caeiro, C., Peirce, K., Burrows, A.M, Kaminski, J. (2013). DogFACS

WATHAN J, Burrows AM, Waller BM, McComb K (2015). EquiFACS: The Equine Facial Action Coding System. PLoS ONE 10(8): e0131738. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0131738

M&M System introduction

Versão Portuguesa aqui

M&M System Principles

– System to focus all animal’s attention in us.
– Create a balance during the training to capture the desirable behaviors and avoid the undesirable behaviors.
– Will increase the human’s attention to all stimuli and increase the chance of avoid/prevent them.
– Can be use in all training and therapy programs with the individual needed adaptations, because we can need more motivation/movement than movement/motivation or the absence of one of them.
– Motivation and movement can be affected by external factors, conditioned training procedures and/or anticipation.
– Motivation and movement must work with the natural animal’s instinct and being above of all external present stimuli.
– Motivation and movement is systematically being tested daily in different environments and species, can be adjusted anytime.

Standard model to exemplify the system

– 0 to 100 is a intensity percentage example only.
– 1 to 5 and vertical separations – possible stages examples.
– Green line is the movement (A). The small vertical black line attached is the error margin (a) that I call the Fail chance.
– The error margin or fail chance is the margin that we have to control the motivation without too much variation of movement. In all training researchs I could analyze that the movement has more influence in motivation than the opposite.
– Blue line is the motivation (B). The green dots (b) are the motivation variation.
– Between the green traces we have the desirable behavior (D).
– Between the green and red traces we have the influence of external factors that can increase or decrease the probability of desirable or undesirable behavior (I).
– After the red traces we have the undesirable behaviors (U).

Stages

First stage- Low Motivation and Low movement= no desirable behavior.

Second stage- Increase of movement that originate increase of motivation but if we increase too much the motivation, the movement probably doesn’t follow the motivation, so we need to reduce the movement to help to reduce the motivation.

Third stage- Stabilization of M&M.

Fourth stage- By increasing the movement we have the increasing of motivation, but if we have too much movement the motivation probably doesn’t follow the movement and we beginning to lose the motivation of dog, that originate a undesirable behavior.

Fifth stage- With the reduce of movement and with the increasing of motivation, we can have a balanced training system.

More informations, practical examples and demonstrations are given in “Teach without Speech” Workshops.







This article would be published in a book for commercial purposes. But we want to reach out more professionals and families with updated and real information, so the content is being released for free. If you believe in this project, make a voluntary contribution of your choice and we can continue with the free publications. If you are a company and want to take an active part in this project, contact us.

The Social Human Animal

Versão Portuguesa aqui.

About 20,000 years ago, humans were already hunters by nature. In this transition from the glacial era and the old world to the new world, the characteristics of our ancestors do not differ much from us, because in the inserted environment already they had well developed tools for hunting, as well as shelters and clothes that already confirm the speed of adaptation and survival.

The humans lived in tribes, small units that survived from hunting and sharing the remains of harvested food. With the progressive changes of the human, physical, as well as behavioral, mental, the obtaining of foods reached another level: Agriculture. The “old” hunter began another change with a deeper co-operation, in addition to cultivation the humans began shortly afterwards in the domestication of sheep, goats, and other animals, certainly captivated by the planted plantations. Horses began to be used in agriculture and transport (later as equipment of human wars), dogs used in hunting and protection of tribes.

This progression in agriculture meant that the tribes, once mobilized for the exhaustive and planned hunts as a way of obtaining food, now managed to generate their own food in large proportions, giving space to small new tasks that were not previously exploited.

Thus we enter the so-called age of specialization, where the hunter and now farmer, initiates an “urban revolution”, the necessity of expansion and division of tasks slowly created a localized interpersonal organization, thus giving rise to cities (supertribes).

The development of these cities and their population (between 7000 and 20 000 inhabitants initially), as well as the invention of writing that led to the existence of inter-communal communications and coordination, has made humans more and more reduced to a number Society) and to face a new stage in its evolution: the adaptation to a Boom of several people, impositions and rules of society necessary for the organization of the same, and the need for a greater interpersonal relationship, which biologically we were not prepared, the Which led to several conflicts, which at the same time were defining the heads of the subordinates making these supertribes some abrupt growth that gave rise to groups of superheads and supersubordinates.

All these social conditions created an “artificial atmosphere”, that is, controls and hierarchies where moral and ethical concepts were already put. With the creation of laws, humans was forbidden to do what the instincts told him, basically we can say that he surrendered to a kind of paradox created by himself, with habits, cultures and specific language in each supertribo, thus becoming A “different” being if it were excluded from it, after all each supertribus had specific characteristics that quickly occurred in contacts outside it. These social identities of language, culture, and religion have greatly altered humans social behavior due to the various changes and adjustments in the supertribes, thus increasing the complexity in the adaptation of our species.

Despite all the disadvantages of this social Boom, we notice that humans has adapted in various ways, continuing to use his exploratory instinct in various social areas, almost as though a survival response.

Thus we have the human creativity to be put into practice in societies, for example gardens, architectural art, among other sequences of events that were (and still are today) allowing man to adapt to the environment. Although the human brain is only 2% of our body mass, it consumes about 25% of all our energy.

This adjustment, however, made man seek greater power and control over others, hierarchies and groups were fought as in the struggles of nature, but this time adapted to a “social standard,” called the 10 commandments of power (Morris 1969):

Clearly display the insignia, postures and gestures of dominator;

– In times of active rivalry, aggressively threaten subordinates;

– In times of physical threat, the chief (or his delegates) must be able to subjugate subordinates;

– If the threat is directed more to the brains than to the muscles, the boss must be able to surpass the subordinates;

– Suppress the quarrels that arise between subordinates;

– Reward immediate subalterns, allowing them to enjoy the benefits of their elevated position;

– Protect the weakest members of the group from all undue persecution;

– Make decisions regarding the social activities of the group;

– From time to time, strengthen the trust of the lesser subordinates

– Always take the initiative by repelling threats or attacks from outside.

All these commandments rule the power. We see nothing more than all the dominant instincts of a wild species that acts by instinct, adapted to a great social evolution.

However, the complexity of this evolution of social behavior made life difficult for bosses, because it created a greater risk in their attitudes and behaviors dominant in the situations, thus creating the supersituations, result of the responsibility / power that the boss has in the management The subalterns and the whole supertribe.

But the very need for organization created a series of “arbitrary inventions” between the groups and subgroups, thus providing a more specialized and competitive social hierarchy, beginning to create distinct social classes, which in time became stronger due to their own Development of education and adaptation, where the age classes began to emphasize this old system of domination and subordination through meritocracy itself.

Our daily diary interactions are guided by innumerable appeasement and/or propitiatory gestures, playful agonistic, with the function of appeasing others and making possible the gregarious life of beings highly aggressive, suspicious and informed to a behavior of hierarchy. Hierarchies are the healthy basis between a species, which has nothing to do with imposition or aggression, but as a means of maintaining social homeostasis.

Research Recommendations: Rosenthal Rats; Prisoner’s dilemma; Principle of Savannah.

We thus entered into a struggle for social domination. The retention of power and influence before subordinates in a variety of ways has enabled situations and supersituations to be controlled in a more manipulative and sustainable manner.

This hunting-situation has changed the paradigm of domination and subordination at high levels, especially in large urban areas, by the permanent and insistent tension with subordinates, thus explaining new behaviors (addressing mainly aggression, targeted aggression and self-aggression) in society and its constant interaction and adaptation.

Biologically, humans defends innately himself, the family and the tribe where he is inserted. Thus, in case of a threat, the defense of the group is intrinsic, and in the social case, we have within the group units for such effect permanently: Police, military or other protection force of the group.

Within these units, the role of chiefs and superheads, in a more developed and somewhat less “human” social context, that is, heads or superheads no longer have to show their face or appear, or even know men, called ” Specialists “, who will send in case of combat.

It is within these “we” and “other” contexts that the inner groups and the outside groups are governed, being in fact a very common justification for more violent acts between groups, because on either side they will be defending their group .

However, wars within the groups themselves are a matter to be mentioned. The subgroups that are created by being “different” from the rest of the group. Not different from habits, cultures or language, but different in opinion, racial tolerance and power. It is the different classes within the group that create subgroups where they create their own attacks, revolutions or other types of intervention.

It is the distinctions between inward groups and outside groups that can, for example, justify slavery, with a great struggle of opinions between the monogenists and the polygenists. Idiosyncrasy is still a reality today.
All the conflicts of the subgroups and their group can also be explained by the very development of social behavior, and by rational and intelligent control of the questions of civilization.

Desmond Morris describes the conditions on how to better analyze and question the conditions that prepare us efficiently for violence between groups:

Development of fixed human territories;

– Dilation of tribes in crowded supertribes;

– Invention of weapons that kill at a distance;

– Removal of the heads of the battle fronts;

– Creation of a class of professional killer;

– Growth of technological inequalities between groups;

– Increased aggression of frustrated situation within the groups;

– The demands of situation rivalries between heads of different groups;

– Loss of social identity within the supertribes;

– Exploration of cooperative instinct to assist the friends attacked.

These conditions lead us to the evidence of overpopulation in the struggle for situations, our species kills itself for reasons that it itself does not know. However, it is evident that animals in overpopulated zoos may also have this behavior.

The conditions for this kind of behavior are trivialized in our day-to-day life as a civilization, taking abortion, homicide, suicide and other situations that lead to our species almost as ecological control of population.

From primitive human to the present day, the population has increased more than 500 times, astronomical numbers compared to other species, which leads us to reflect on the need for this population control.

These our intraspecies struggles have caused the ideological commitment of some authors to manipulate the ambiguous and / or unambiguous sense of certain terms of ethology that have been appropriated and redefined with the loss of their traditional meaning for human sociology. Words like ‘hierarchy’, ‘dominance’, ‘property’ or ‘territory’ were extrapolated from biology to culture, accentuating the erroneous character and anthropomorphism and anthropocentrism, calling into question their functions, evolution and subsequent ritualization. Not better, other terms appear to replace others, generating even more humanization, confusion, and incoherence.

The other species were thus doomed to labels and erroneous phenomena of their behavior explained by human ignorance, assumptions, and fallacies that are being passed down from generation to generation without a logical foundation in their words other than the need to mark presence at the moment To explain what is socially normal. The science is very clear in the difference of zoosemiotic in intra-species communication (intragroup / intragroup) and interspecies. All studies prove this assertion in both primates and other species.

The use of terms like “You are a donkey”, proof of anthropomorphism created for the sake of the insignificance of other beings, thus creating young humans a stereotype about our supremacy over other species. Humans, from an early age, mentalize children about the feelings of zoo animals or other similar situations, giving a false reality to the needs of other species and a sense of normalcy and welfare.

The human species had a very rapid development compared to the other species. From natural habitats he moved into a world that was fortuitously artificial and gigantic, altering not only the mode of interaction and living, but also customs and other forms of survival. It will be necessary to demonstrate how much it was necessary for the human species to adapt so quickly to the pressure that the change provided.

But is this control something “human”? Does the fact that we currently avoid war with war or the threat of nuclear or chemical technology also influence this behavior?

We are evolving and somehow being protected by fear itself, outside groups sometimes mingle with the inner groups, creating the subgroups within the groups, the most alarming question is when will there be that difference, and if so Persist how we will deal with it in a “human” way, without the use of technology that can simply decimate us from the planet? What is the measurement model for us to be superior? What benefits at the species level make us rational if we live for the moment in a virtual reality? What is the concept for such? How can we be rational if we are quickly condemned to the needs of the society we live in?

Humans look for their social silhouette. Social networks opened this door of opportunity to our most primitive instincts, thus allowing the creation of groups, paranoid states, disorganized and incoherent, systematized delusions, where the constant struggles are only the territorial struggles of our ancestors now with the defense of a Virtual shield that facilitates a kind of social mimicry.

Culture is the biological adaptation of the human genus that has key properties or characteristics that are subject to the same evolutionary algorithm, selective variation, retention, transmission. It is based on human nature and constrained by it. Culture and society are reciprocally dependent as functional units.

Our society (or our group, or the anthropological site) has been improving some primitive instincts of our species, especially that of curiosity, the need to search, find and verify. The most common example is criticism and loss aversion, because we pay more attention to the negative because it is an instinctive sign of danger.

The modern human can still use and abuse this “freedom”, but will future generations of supertribors be able to adapt and, above all, face such a wide range of what we are doing. All together, we enter the retroactive of natural selection (natural selection – social selection – sexual selection based on social selection).

The Dominican in human societies has evolved from sexual potency and violence to biol- ernance, with a tendency to evolve more with the help of the social sciences in conjunction with evolutionary psychology.

Humans, dogs and horses, especially, had a cruel heritage from our ancestors. We live in cement cages manipulated by the chiefs of this super-tribe. They are subject to the ever-changing cultures of every tribe, whose only duty is to obey our whims. But we all have something in common: We’re scared. We may not have this notion, perhaps that is why we should pay more attention to them and understand that we are together.

We should use inter-species and inter-species understanding and respect as a lesson to our intra-species relationship and be more asymmetrical and coherent.

The modern human was forced to shift to his own survival. We would be surprised how we continue to be a primitive tribal hunter, ill equipped to face the social risks of an impersonal community.

The old primitive hunter uses another garment, another weapon and another paradigm: Survive in this cement jungle.

Main image: “We already are to dismiss our own species with so many evolution needed yet” — Roberto Barata







This article would be published in a book for commercial purposes. But we want to reach out more professionals and families with updated and real information, so the content is being released for free. If you believe in this project, make a voluntary contribution of your choice and we can continue with the free publications. If you are a company and want to take an active part in this project, contact us.

References

ANDERSON, C. & Kilduff, G. (2009). Why dominant personalities attain influence in face-to-face gourds? The competence-signaling effects of trait dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Phychology, 96(2):491-503.

BAUMEISTER, R. (2005). The cultural animal. London: Oxford University Press.

BLANK, R. & HINES, S. (2001). Biology and Political Science. New York: Routledge.

BUSS, D. (2001). Human nature and culture: An evolutionary psychological perspective. Journal of Personality, 69,955-978.

DEMELLO, M. (2012). Animals and Society: An introduction to human-animal studies. Columbia University Press.

GREENE, J. (2013). Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them. New York: Penguin books.

HENRICH, N. (2007). Why humans cooperate. New York: Oxford University Press.

MORRIS, D. (1967). The Naked Ape: A Zoologist’s Study of the Human Animal. Delta(1999).

MORRIS, D. (1969). The Human Zoo. Kodansha America, Inc.

MORRIS, D. (2002). PeopleWatching. Vintage Books.

SCOTT, J. P. (1976). Violence and social Disaggregation. Aggressive Behavior, 1, 235-260.

Teach without Speech – Introduction

Versão Portuguesa aqui

“Teach without Speech” project is one of the most difficult challenges I’ve had in my entire career. It took me to memories that I already thought were well forgotten. What model of measurement would I have to do to share the knowledge I gained through various personal and professional sacrifices?

Since 2004, before many television programs and Youtube to help train trainers that I began to give training classes without any specific training. I read a little, and started. I just felt like I had to start. An irresponsibility at the time in my current vision, but had to start somewhere.

By nature I am a quiet person and I prefer ​​my personal space, certainly for that reason I have always tried to communicate with the animals to speak as little as possible and to respect their space. That’s the basic principles of nature. When we see animals in their natural environment, we notice that sounds are used when strictly necessary, with a prioritization of body language and the use of the environment for a clear communication. I used food only as a tool and not as something essential for training, I do not establish relationships based on food. Complementing with a training plan that made me have the right number of snacks for the number of repetitions, I didn’t want to create conditioning to specific places in my body. After these years, I notice that I use the same or even less amount of food than before in contrast of the new generations.

However, that year I joined the Portuguese Air Force in the specialty of Air Police and sub-specialty in K9 training for guard and defense. It was one of the best years of my life. Not only professionally but also personally. Professional because of the spirit of camaraderie and values ​​passed by the “olders”, personal because it was an abrupt transition from a “golden cradle” passed to reality of life.

I have always continued to study and value myself professionally from the point of view of military teaching and from other places where I have worked, because I have always believed that only with the practice we would change theory, but in some work environments this is not always allowed.

After several frustrations, disappointments and relegations, I risked all my personal and professional life in a last opportunity to continue doing what I always liked. This change allowed me to value who believed in me, invest in what really mattered in life and put aside all that was just an unnecessary burden. I summarized my life with two hand luggage and traveled to Denmark to deepen my knowledge, have the freedom to follow my principles and intuition and at the same time work with the Ethology Institute and etologi.dk. There will never be words to describe the appreciation of the trust and professionalism of Dr. Roger Abrantes, Tilde Detz Jensen and the entire team of Ethology Institute and etologi.dk. It was at the Ethology Institute that I found the scientific answers to what I already did, I was always a student of the institute and did not know. Not always the best decisions are the easiest. Listen and trust in your intuition, it is your essence speaking.

During this time until now, many dogs and people daily have crossed my life. Several situations unfortunately I did not get the necessary collaboration of the families, others I feel today that was due to my limitation of knowledge. We do not know everything, we can’t know everything.

In the meantime, I took formation in a new area that has given me a lot of interest and it is in her that I currently dedicate myself to 100% of my work: Anthrozoology.

Anthrozoology or Human-Animal Studies in general is the study of the interaction between humans and nonhumans. It covers a considerable diversity of areas of study, where I highlight: ethology, anthropology, zoology, biology, comparative psychology, sociology and primatology. This is my world, of complexity, of paradoxes, well, the human world.

This is certainly the first project in the world that will cover this area integrated in animal training, complemented by animal facial decoding, micro expressions in a scientific context and by a set of specific daily techniques that can be used by all.

All this learning until today makes this my small vision can somehow help the various professionals in the area, who is starting the activity, and families with pets. They will be the trainers of the future.

Our future role will be just coaching, contrary to the old fashion of “turnkey” animal training. Without the presence of the families, we cut the important link of this wonderful communication. The society is becoming more curious and participatory in the education of its animals, something fabulous and evolutionary, that will make the coaches having a solid formation not only in animal behavior and learning, but also in philosophy, ethology and in the most recent area : Anthrozoology. We need to know ourselves as primitive animals before trying to know other species.

The role of coach in the social education of animals and their families can be a very unpleasant job for some because it does not bring trophies, bowls and most of the time recognition. On the other hand, they will also not be containers of diplomas, demonstrations with own or previously selected dogs or with big texts or socially accepted words. With this paradigm shift, these human objects will finally confirm to be parallel issues in the treatment and training of living beings.

We are working with the most sensitive point of a society: its mentality. To make a family believe he needs to change some routines is not always easy, we enter into a paradox of “he’s a dog, he has to be treated as such”, but “I do not do it because he’s like a son to me.”

Nowadays, the priority is not to know the other species, but rather to know ourselves. Our individual selfish need for presence in society is bringing an artificial environment in our habitat for all species, moralistic fallacies are beautifying socially accepted words and divert them from the reality of their concepts and applications, either by marketing purposes or simple ignorance. The need for change it’s in the evolution of our real knowledge and not by cover-up the reality by the lack of the knowledge. We’re not helping them, we’re in the medium term extinguish them because they are leaving their essence and no longer being what we argue now that they are.

The interspecific communication is much more than understanding, is a journey to our origins when we deeply felt it without the imposed human barriers.

Once again I am sure that these internal conflicts, the nights badly slept with the concern of one or another case, of daily understand the lack of communication that exist not only between people and dogs but also between people and people, was a reason for the origin of this project.

My opinion about the work of others is respect, because respect and agreement follow the same parallelism that science vs. moralism or ethics. After all, nobody is the same, which is wonderful. Do not try to please thoughts or ideologies, people already have their interests and will not value your sincerity. Do not be deceived by the delusions of others.

“Teach without Speech” project is the result of all these years of study and daily practical experience. It can’t be considered a method, but rather a combination system of various approaches in animal training, adapted to all species, although I put more emphasis on dogs, cats and horses, which I work daily. It is not just a project of scientific knowledge with the latest studies on the spoken materials.

It is also a reflection we must make on the “eight and eighty” in which we live today. The attempt of many to fight against anthropomorphism is creating incoherent humanization without people’s understanding. At the moment we need to fight for harmony and balance among all species that live scared in this human zoo.

“Teach without Speech” project goes far beyond a taught technique. It is interspecific respect and understanding in its essence.

“Teach without Speech” project don’t go teach to train robots, but will make the reader think by themself about what we really are and how we act. Only after that reflexion, we’ll be able to communicate with others species without fallacies or force, but with knowledge, comprehension and respect.

This project will have articles about some general issues of my studies and ways that I have created to simplify the understanding in the training, and are complemented by practical workshops, where I have the opportunity to demonstrate and pass with more detail and individual adaptation the whole system of the “Teach without Speech” for the three species, it has been a pleasure to work with individuals and companies around the world, to know the cultures, to respect them and connect them throughout this matrix. Perhaps with this beginning we may in the future study each social culture and make the necessary adaptations.

I make the invitation and the healthy challenge to read each article that will be published with the attention they deserve and what we need. Nosce te ipsum. Carpe Diem!

København, June 2nd 2016







This article would be published in a book for commercial purposes. But we want to reach out more professionals and families with updated and real information, so the content is being released for free. If you believe in this project, make a voluntary contribution of your choice and we can continue with the free publications. If you are a company and want to take an active part in this project, contact us.