• FiskFisk33@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 hours ago

    On the contrary, that’s why it’s perfect. There is so much evidence in so many different context that positive reinforcement yields better results than negative.

    This is congruent with your donkey example.

    • I’ve seen both “carrot on a stick” meaning to offer something the other party wants to get them to do what you want with no negatives/punishment, but there is also “carrot and a stick” which means employing both positive and negative reinforcement.

  • over_clox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    2 days ago

    You don’t hit the donkey with the stick silly! 😂🤣

    You sit on the donkey and use the stick like a fishing pole. Dangle the carrot in front of the donkey’s face with a string, and the donkey will walk in whichever direction you guide it.

  • Overkrill@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    its an archaism. a modern understanding of animal behavior and ethics have both pushed that training modality out, and probably the more successful animal trainers of yore never really relied on it, but people absolutely used to beat the shit out of animals. perhaps not often, and perhaps not horribly, but animal cruelty was certainly common enough to enter the lexicon. see “carriage whip”. see “spurs”. see “bearing rein”. see “branding iron”. etc etc. hell theres even the phrase “spare the rod, spoil the child”.

    and this is not the worst place a study of the history of language will take you. remember that european and white north american cultures both (among others) unabashedly practiced chattel slavery for centuries, if not millennia for older cultures.

  • BleatingZombie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    In addition to all of the other answers, I’ve heard the phrase “carrot or the stick” significantly more than “and”

    I think it’s more like a threat

  • masterspace@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is a little naiive imho. I get what you’re saying, but the reality that has been proven time and time again is that if you’re willing to stoop low enough and cause enough suffering, it is possible to break most animals’ spirits.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    A donkey absolutely would…

    Humans are different, and a positive reward is more effective. Although not a sustained positive reward intermittent random positive rewards are most effective with people.

    Like how someone won’t enjoy work even tho they get a steady paycheck, but a slot machine is considered entertainment. Or a $10 raise per paycheck vs a $100 bonus, the bonus is less money but it feels special.

    We’re wired to keep trying for the big endorphin hit of winning, not the delayed payoff of a paycheck a week or two later.

  • Fleur_@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    No you’re not hitting it with enough force or frequency with the stick if it’s not working. You have to entirely break an animal’s spirit and then you can encourage it. Circuses have been doing this for centuries