"I support Muslims who love freedom" (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
OP
Martin

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #441
    I'm not a fan of corporal punishment. I don't think it should be used in a systematic way, not because its harmful, not because its child abuse, but because it isn't really beneficial in the long term and doesn't provide the right incentives. When you say its child abuse, it implies rather strongly that you think its downright wrong, and should be completely eradicated, i don't agree with that. I think that in some cases it can be helpful.
    The exact argument, to the letter, can be made about adults. It's not harmful, it's not beneficial, doesn't provide the right incentives. And yet it is completely banned. How come? What if "providing the right incentives" is more important than you think? What if setting an example is more important than you think? What if holding yourself, as a parent or teacher, to a higher standard, is more important than you think?

    What if we should actually expect parents to do this, would that be so crazy? What if there should be social progress, and the fact that something has been going on for a long time is not a good reason why it should continue? Is that crazy?
     

    Buy on AliExpress.com
    OP
    Martin

    Martin

    Senior Member
    Dec 31, 2000
    56,913
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #442
    Why do 18 year olds have more responsibilities and burdens? Is it not because they are assumed to have higher cognitive abilities, hgiher independence, etc?
    Higher cognitive abilities? I'm not so sure. Independence yes, but that is pretty much a function of how society is organized. 18 year olds have independence because they are being prepared for this for a long time, they are taught to expect it. There's no reason you couldn't give them independence at 14 or 24.
     

    Fred

    Senior Member
    Oct 2, 2003
    41,113
    Higher cognitive abilities? I'm not so sure. Independence yes, but that is pretty much a function of how society is organized. 18 year olds have independence because they are being prepared for this for a long time, they are taught to expect it. There's no reason you couldn't give them independence at 14 or 24.
    Why not give it to them at 7 then?
     
    OP
    Martin

    Martin

    Senior Member
    Dec 31, 2000
    56,913
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #444
    Why not give it to them at 7 then?
    Are 7 year olds cognitively less developed than 14 year olds? Yes, they are. Why is the lack of cognition an enabler for hitting? The younger the kid is the less developed he is, does that mean you should hit him less and less as he grows up? So that 2 year olds get the worst beatings?
     
    Jun 13, 2007
    7,233
    Martin, if your question is 'why should adults be treated differently?'; Fred already gave you plenty of reasons why. There's no point trying to twist the argument. The premise here is clear. You are far more likely to be aware of your actions as you grow older and chances are; the opposite is also true. If you are not very aware of the consequences of your actions, then of course an authority should be able to tell you what to do. You can't just expect a child to rationally figure out everything for himself. That's why parents use this method with children; they use corporal punishment to try to implement a sort of behavior which they see appropriate.


    So why don't we hit an adult's wrists with a ruler? Because we expect adults to understand the consequences of their actions and be responsive to verbal threats. If you tell an adult, 'don't do this or I will fire you'; he is likely to respond. This isn't the same with kids. At least not all the time. If you tell a child, 'Play nice or I will take away your toys', the child is going to do one of two things. Either he will listen to you, or he will play rough in spite of you.

    What happens in schools? You get the kids who had gone through good parenting, and those who had gone through bad parenting. The former group respond well to threats because they understand the consequences of their actions. The latter group does not respond to threats and are likely to rebel against their teachers when presented with one. That's probably why teachers use corporal punishment in some schools, to try to discipline those who constantly misbehave and are unresponsive verbal warnings.

    Is that humane? Is it moral? These questions are circumstantial. If a child is causing harm and disruption to his classmates and class and nothing other than corporal punishment can discipline him; then it's not immoral. If a child is spanked and punished and his parents and teachers resort to physical punishment as their first option; then yes, it could be considered immoral.

    These methods may seem primitive and unappealing and I don't happen to agree with them personally. I certainly wouldn't want to physically harm my child no matter how little pain is inflicted, but to go out and say that it's child abuse is being a little too dramatic. I see it as a method of parenting that could be effective or not, depending on the child; is it the best method? Probably not. Could it be useful? Maybe. Is it child abuse? Certainly not.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)