If somebody’s definition of “reinforcement-based” excludes anyone who also uses corrections, that’s a strawman – they’re distorting what balanced trainers actually do to keep you in their marketing sphere. That’s not curiosity and they’re not describing training. They’re drawing a line in the sand so they can stand on their self-appointed high ground.
And, if somebody’s version of “curious” only extends to trainers who already agree with them, that’s not curiosity. That’s a marketing echo chamber with better branding.
The best modern dog trainers don’t need that line in the sand; they already know reinforcement-based training is the obvious BASELINE, not the whole system. Consequences, applied thoughtfully and fairly, are part of how a dog learns to trust the process, not the opposite of it. Any trainer still pretending otherwise hasn’t caught up. And any trainer still deciding who counts as a great trainer based on which tools someone uses isn’t asking questions. They’re just gatekeeping.
Staying curious isn’t easy. It means risking the wrath of a tribe that isn’t always ready – or interested – in growth. A lot of people would rather have the comfort and security of belonging to a tribe than do the sometimes difficult work of actually becoming a better dog trainer, and I don’t blame or judge them for that – it’s human nature. We all do it in one sphere of our lives or another.
But, as with fitness, nutrition, dog training, you name it – REAL growth, REAL curiosity, often means looking inward and questioning not just the beliefs of the tribe, but your OWN beliefs, as well as your OWN reactions to things that SHOULD invoke curiosity.