Animal trainers

[peter]

(12-11-2015, 06:20 PM)Spalea Wrote: @sanjay:

No problem Sanjay ! You're sincere and I trust you completely... That is why I am fond of this site about wild animals .

I only criticized this author - who seems me outrageous towards lions, - and the natural tendancy among people which consists of uttering some string of commonplaces like "male lion is lazy and does nothing but sleep, only the lioness is active", "Tiger is the only one most beautiful, powerful big cat" and so on... The nature hates the Useless and the imbalances...

Thanks for the info, Spalea. We understand, take it seriously and will act accordingly.

Here's some things to consider regarding forums and human interaction. Before you start, I want you to know it is not personal. Now imagine you are the one running a forum. Ok?     

1 - Humans and preference
 
We known that humans and preference are very strongly connected. Trainers often are not that different from posters. Same for biologists, politicians and all others. Just the way it is and it will never change.

2 - How to deal with preference on a forum?

My take is we need to learn to deal with it. The best way to start is to contact your 'enemies' right away and start training. Read books of preferenced tiger or lion trainers and when they start on the qualities of their favourites and degrade the other cat just add a bit of salt. I thought Beatty's book was very interesting in spite of his preference (and mine). Most of us, if not all, have something to say that is of interest. In many cases, preference or something very close to it is the drive for human action.

3 - The policy of WildFact

It is admittedly not easy to learn how to use preference in the most productive way. Many of us will never quite master it. What shall we do in order to prevent problems? Avoid ideas and books we don't like? Or should we decide for a different approach? 

We want good information and good debates. Debates are needed to assess the value and reach of information. They also are needed to learn how to use information in the best way. The way we see it is: No debates = no opposing views = no exchange of ideas = no development = no knowledge = swimming in circles.

This was typical for the Middle Ages and it resulted in lots of circles and no fundamental progress for hundreds of years. Those who had the audacity to ask questions or published a few ideas not to the liking of those in control were faced with the Inquisition. This resulted in torture, pleading guilty and being roasted on a fire in most cases. A scenarion good for some and bad for most.

But this policy surely is out today? No. 

I propose to go to a region divided by a river loaded with big crocs and no bridges. When they want to see their relatives, people just swim to the other side. When one is taken by a croc, the conclusions is he was a 'bad' man. This attitude will result in lots of 'magicians' able to 'communicate' with crocs in order to get people across the river without too much loss of life (not all can get across safely, because of the large number of 'bad' people).

Magicians are not cheap. We also know crocs will never quit asking a higher fee. What to do? Let's suppose those who need to get across decide to start a debate. The debate could result in the decision to build a boat. Or a bridge. Before the debate starts, however, the magicians, facing less trade, will try to prevent it. How? Well, they could scare those who use their powers into action (if you don't participate, the fee will rise). This, more often than not, will result in intimidation, destruction and even murder. In many cases, the result will be no debate in order to prevent problems. Magicians happy and crocs happy. But the information available on rivers, crocs, humans crossing the river and crocs taking humans wasn't used in the best way because those not interested in a debate had no use for it. Remember this example is based on reality, not fiction. 
              
4 - To conclude

Those who run this forum know about humans, preference and the most common result of interaction between those opposing each other. We saw destruction and concluded there should be another way to interact. Our aim is good information, respect and good debates. And this is how it will be. My advice is not to worry. Sanjay in particular is a very balanced man.

We hope our members agree. We would also appreciate suggestions and a bit of advice, starting with the posts of PC. What do you think? Delete or discuss? Reasons? Reply