Peter De Smidt wrote:

snip

Does anyone really think that a dog's genetics doesn't influence his
behavior, or that differn't breeds have, on average, different
behavioral traits?

Not nearly as much as you think, apparently. (We'll save the argument about
humans for a later time). However, start with this: An attack is a behavior,
not an instinct. In dogs as in humans, behavior is plastic. Temperament,
which is the expression of genetically determined psychology (among other
things) notoriously varies widely among individuals of all breeds. How the
temperament is expressed can be, and is, routinely modified.

Such a claim flies in the face of overwhelming
evidence,

In the case of aggressiveness it is in fact _supported_ by the evidence,
notably the dog bite statistics. As nearly as we can tell from the facts,
and despite the reputation to the contrary, dog breeds don't vary
significantly in biting behavior. And we know both from experience and
studies that dog behavior is quite straightforward to modify.

such as, for instance, the various studies that analyze the
intelligence of different breeds. Yet such an unlikely claim must be
assumed by those who say that all doggie behavioral problems are caused
by bad training.

Major error there. The specific claim is that in at least the vast majority
of dogs, regardless of breed, adequate training and socialization will
produce a dog with acceptable behavior, including not attacking people or
other animals. That is a very different claim and one well-supported by the
facts and experience.

What causes 'doggie behavioral problems' is a moot point. The important
point is that such problems can almost always be controlled with training
and socialization. The secondary point is that unacceptable behavior, such
as aggression, can be controlled in all breeds of dogs.

--RC



-Peter De Smidt