There is a list created by a well-known ‘positive’ trainer that cites 12 reasons why you shouldn’t use punishment. One of the objections is this…

“Punishment doesn’t actually teach the animal anything, it stops behavior from happening.”

On the surface this looks like a credible objection. It is parroted by literally thousands of dog trainers and major ‘experts’ in the behavior niche. In the broader, real world, it is lunacy. As with all skeptical views, I start with accepting the premise and then pick at it to sees if it still makes sense. This doesn’t.

OK. Punishment doesn’t teach anything. I guess first, we’d have to look at the word ‘teach’ and see what it means.

Here’s a simple definition of ‘teach’ from Webster…
a : to cause to know something
b : to cause to know how
c : to accustom to some action or attitude teach students to think for themselves
d : to cause to know the disagreeable consequences of some action

Oops. The objection to punishment is that it doesn’t teach anything, it stops behaviors. The first three dictionary definitions seem to support a ‘positive’ and ‘additive’ effect from teaching. They are about adding behaviors to a repertoire. The fourth one is problematic for claiming the punishment doesn’t teach anything. It describes connecting ‘disagreeable consequences’ to some act or behavior. Houston, we have a problem with the word ‘teach’. That is our first logical error, exposed. If punishment connects an aversive stimulus to a behavior, it IS an example of ‘teaching something’. It also ‘stops behavior’. So, stopping a behavior IS an example of teaching something.

Second Logical Error:
Most fancy-pants behaviorists use the term ‘behavior modification’ rather than the more common terms, teach and learn. They do that because behavior modification means the animal behaves differently after an experience that it did before. They call this ‘operant conditioning’ – a fancy way of saying that behavior changes based on the consequences connected to it. Push a button on a Coke machine and you get a delightful carbonated soda. Push your finger on a cactus needle and you stop pushing your finger on cactus needles. Both are examples of ‘operant learning’/behavior modification.

Now we get to the root of the problem. The same people who oppose the use of punishment believe that only ‘positive’ influences should be used. They claim that modern, scientific non-punishment procedures can control behavior. Oops. We now have our second error. If an objection to punishment is that it stops behavior, why wouldn’t that be an objection to positive reinforcement? The answer is that positive reinforcement, by definition, increases behavior and cannot stop anything. They propose that somehow modern training methods can handle all behavior problems except one – they can’t stop an unacceptable behavior. When you boil this down, they object to anything that would stop a behavior – because only punishment can do that. Is that a problem? You betcha.

The majority of dogs that are ‘at risk’ are so because of acts of commission. The DO things. If you can stop those things, they live happily ever after. If you can’t stop them in a timely fashion (often meaning immediately) for an affordable price, the dog is kicked into rescue and shelters. It’s chances of a good life become smaller. Many are destroyed for want of homes that don’t have a problem with destroyed furniture, injured children, animal control ‘at large’ citations and noise complaints. There aren’t many of those homes available because they already have four or five out of control dogs.

It’s your choice. Believe fairy tales from people who admit they can’t stop behaviors (and you shouldn’t either) or learn how to inhibit unacceptable behavior. Flip the coin. One way is lunacy and often death and one way leads to a good life. I choose life.