Was the woman shrieking “Walkies!” in a Woodhousian sort of way?
At least Woodhouse had a philosophy and a line of thinking behind it, regardless of whether you buy into it or not. My neighbor, her daughter in law, and I were all 
at this womans screaming. Was just random, with no explanation.
I dunno. Whatever.
Either she was a performance artist or a nut. (Come to think of it, the same could be said for Woodhouse.)
I dunno. Wiki says “Advocates” are a profession. Fuck, they even list lawyers as a profession. Seriously.
The dog trainers’ association’s claim to professional status does not make dog training a profession.
I get a kick out of that. I’m a paddle/ski bum – live in a chalet, ski to my ski hill, have crews that paddle me about in the evenings, field questions from outdoor ed uni students from across the province, write on the subjects, have formal credentials and decades of experience earning my keep paddling and skiing before before I took up a far less reputable occupation, but that does not make paddling or skiing professions. Pity, but there it is.
Um. . .OK.
Muffin, maybe it would help if you gave your working definition of ‘profession’.
(there’s a good boy!)
I suspect that this is one of those cases that hinges on semantics and two common sense uses of the term. Is that right?
(Oh yes it is! Yes it isssy wizzy! Who want’s a snack?!)
It appears to me (though I could certainly be wrong), that you’re drawing a distinction between, say, an occupation and a profession.
(Who’s a good boy?! Who’s drawing a distinction?! Who gets a Beggin’ Strip?!)
That is, you seem to be saying that just because you earn money at something doesn’t make it a profession per se. That language makes a distinction between professions, such as accountants, firemen, or geologists, and simple occupations, such as ticket taker, stock clerk, or, as you seem to be arguing, dog trainers. That there is some quanta of training involved doesn’t give rise to shifting it from an occupation to a profession.
(Am I close? Go get the ball!!!)
I assume you also see that in another usage, a professional is distinguished merely by making a living at it/earning an income. It can get a bit messy (when does an income-generating hobby become a profession? The IRS actually has rule to that effect), but the basic intuition is there. Someone can spend their whole life working in a toll booth, and that person was a professional ticket-taker.
(Give me the stick. Common, DROP IT! GIVE ME THE FREAKIN’ STICK!!!)
While there’s a gray area between the two–even stock clerks have company training videos to watch–I daresay that studying and learning animal behavior and human behavior (after all, you’re learning to teach an owner how to act with their pooch) pushes it closer to both versions of professional. While certainly there is less schooling than a neurosurgeon, and certainly any hack can put out a shingle and take an online course, that there are various schools and approaches to be learned and mastered, and a lot of training that (can) take place, suggests that entering the field of dog training can take as much commitment as the concept of professional would warrant.
(who’s a good boy?!)
Care to help us out, Muffin? What makes a profession? Governmental licensure?
I’m going with the dictionary.com definition: a vocation requiring knowledge of some department of learning or science.
Interestingly, it references (by way of comparison) the idea of a learned profession, which it then defines as: any of the three vocations of theology, law, and medicine, commonly held to require highly advanced learning. This was brought up by Crotalus as the narrow definition that Muffin may be referring to.
Dog parks are neutral ground. Dogs commonly get along there because they have no turf to defend. It may be a different story when the dog is closer to its home. A dog can become territorial, even if encountering a dog which is familiar to him from another place. Unless your neighbor’s dog plays with your dog frequently at your homes, the neighbor’s dog essentially told your dog, “Hey, you’re on my turf now and I don’t appreciate the familiarity. How about getting out of my face?”
Howsabout members of the oldest profession?
Here are some features of professions:
– Extensive formal university education (or the equivalent) including both theoretical and practical knowledge.
– Comprehensive professional board examinations before recognition as a full member of a profession.
– Significant apprenticeship or supervision before recognition as a full member of a profession, and significant continuing education requirements throughout one’s career.
– Self-governance of the professional body delegated by the state.
– Disciplinary powers held by the professional body including sanctions and expulsion.
– Licensure, such that the profession can only be practiced by members licensed by the professional association.
Now let’s have a look at dog trainers, and the APDT in particular:
– The APDT differentiates between dog trainers and professional dog trainers, with APDT professional dog trainers having to meet formal education and experiential requirements of one of a variety of other organizations (there is no APDT provided or designed education), but regular APDT dog trainers not having to meet any such requirements.
– No comprehensive APDT professional board examinations before recognition as a full member, and in fact no APDT competency evaluations at all.
– No APDT apprenticeship or APDT supervision required before recognition as a full member, and no ongoing continuing education requirement.
– No APDT self-governance delegated by the state.
– No APDT disciplinary powers.
– No APDT licensure authority.
In other words, the APDT is an industry association that promotes the interests of its members and encourages its members to develop their skills, but is not a professional body, despite its name. Perhaps someday it will get to the point that it is a professional body. Good for it if it does. It is not there yet.
With respect to the screamer, her being a dog trainer does not mean that she is a professional, if she were a member of the APDT, it would not mean that she is a professional, and if she were a professional member of the APDT, it would not mean that she is a professional, although perhaps someday professional members of the APDT might be professionals, depending on how the association develops over the years.
Or let’s look at this from an other direction. The screamer acted in a way that was contrary to what one would expect of a dog trainer. What is the recourse? Is there a professional body that has the regulatory authority to fine the screamer, or to require that the screamer take a course that would address her failing? Nope. Ergo no, she is not a professional.
This is straying off the topic, which is the dog-related behavior of a woman claiming to offer services as a dog trainer – not the definition of “professional.” Let it go.
Perhaps the place for debating the definition of “professional” would be Great Debates, should anyone like to continue the discussion.
Ellen Cherry
MPSIMS Moderator
Deleted after seeing mod’s post.
^^Moderated like a true professional!
Win.
That was one of my favorite threads ever. Read, but don’t wake the Christmas Spiders zombie.
[Friendly Giant]Look up, way up.[/Friendly Giant]