Reply With Quote
I'd rather see him be willing to be educated on a proper form of spanking too.
However for the protection of children there needs to be laws and enforcement on the books for baboons who think overdoing it is okay.
What does it feel like to know that you're on your last legs and likely to die at any moment?
I'd rather see him be willing to be educated on a proper form of spanking too.
However for the protection of children there needs to be laws and enforcement on the books for baboons who think overdoing it is okay.
wtf are you talking about ? if the state don't protect childs from abusive parents who is gonna do it ?
Strawman. Not a single person in this thread has advocated for a lack of discipline in parenting. Reinforcement, both positive and negative, are great ways to instill good character traits and modify troubling behavior.
Physical punishment teaches one thing: Fear. That's it. And when fear is engaged, EVERYTHING else in the brain shuts off. It becomes fight or flight.
This is a PERFECT example of the effect fear has. Do you think that kid is going to learn to cook the day or week after he burns his hand on the stove? Of course not. He likely won't even go near the thing because it hurt him. What positives result from him burning his hand? He won't do the same thing again (out of fear) but he also won't do anything productive with that knowledge. And even a 4 year old can differentiate between a stove (i.e., an object with no will of its own) and a parent who absolutely makes choices of their own accord. When you choose to hit a kid, he knows you're not just a stove burning him because it's hot. He knows you're burning him because you're hot -- and because you didn't take the time to make any other choice in the matter but to beat the bad behavior out of him.If you put your hand on a hot stove, and it burns you, is the only thing you learn is that the stove is something to be scared of?
Children that are very rarely spanked as kids don't learn the lesson from the spanking nearly as much as the very serious talk they undoubtedly have with their parents afterward about the ramifications of behavior.
I think his point is that it can be slippery slope when you start to get the state overly involved, which I agree with.
Psychobabble. I was responding to Brazil's point about dogs learning from positive reinforcement. They do learn to have good behavior from that, but bad behavior is curbed through punishment. It's clear from your post that you don't understand reinforcement/punishment. Negative reinforcement (taking away something a kid/animal doesn't like) doesn't discourage poor behavior any more than positive reinforcement does. You're thinking of negative punishment (which is taking away something that a kid/animal likes).
Lol. Kids don't cower in the corner just because they feel pain. Sure, a bad burn will affect a young kid to a larger extent than a minor burn would affect a teenager. But it's not like the brain just shuts off any time it feels any pain whatsoever. If that happened, then conditioning wouldn't work.This is a PERFECT example of the effect fear has. Do you think that kid is going to learn to cook the day or week after he burns his hand on the stove? Of course not. He likely won't even go near the thing because it hurt him. What positives result from him burning his hand? He won't do the same thing again (out of fear) but he also won't do anything productive with that knowledge. And even a 4 year old can differentiate between a stove (i.e., an object with no will of its own) and a parent who absolutely makes choices of their own accord. When you choose to hit a kid, he knows you're not just a stove burning him because it's hot. He knows you're burning him because you're hot -- and because you didn't take the time to make any other choice in the matter but to beat the bad behavior out of him.
I've already conceded that hitting a kid creates negative associations for the parent. But it also creates negative associations with the behavior. If it didn't, then reinforcement wouldn't work either. Balancing out punishment with positive activities is how a parent maintains a good reputation with their kids. Even if you never hit your kid, if all you do is punish them, they won't like you. But as you can see, many of us who had parents who hit us still have great relationships with them.
I think we all agree that it's important to talk to your kids and explain any punishment you give them. I honestly think the moment a parent loses control is when they start saying things like, "Because I said so." Kids don't learn anything from statements like that. Hitting doesn't teach right from wrong; it creates an aversion to certain things. Parents still have to parent.Children that are very rarely spanked as kids don't learn the lesson from the spanking nearly as much as the very serious talk they undoubtedly have with their parents afterward about the ramifications of behavior.
I want the er jailed for it.
I can't believe anyone wants society to let him do what he wants to this defenseless kid.
There's no such thing as "negative punishment". It's just called "punishment". There is no "positive punishment" in Psychology, and guess why that is? Because punishment does not alter behavior in a positive way. This is my field, mind you, so I do know what I'm talking about in this case.
Let's be really clear here: We aren't talking about a papercut. We aren't talking about falling and scraping a knee. A hand on a 350 degree oven is instant, overwhelming pain, especially to a 4 year old who hasn't developed the tools to rationalize what's happening. If you don't think a 4 year old goes into instant self-preservation mode the second he feels that heat, I don't know what to say. You're just wrong. When you abuse a child, you (hopefully) aren't burning them, but you're still putting them in that place of fear. Conditioning to that extent works PRECISELY because the subject is AFRAID of what will happen. Not because they're learning the what and why of the situation. It's an off switch. OVEN BAD. Neurotransmitters have already changed.Lol. Kids don't cower in the corner just because they feel pain. Sure, a bad burn will affect a young kid to a larger extent than a minor burn would affect a teenager. But it's not like the brain just shuts off any time it feels any pain whatsoever. If that happened, then conditioning wouldn't work.
This research from Healy, 2004.Babies and children who suffer abuse may also experience trauma that is unrelated to direct physical damage. Exposure to domestic violence, disaster, or other traumatic events can have long-lasting effects. An enormous body of research now exists that provides evidence for the long-term damage of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse on babies and children. We know that children who experience the stress of abuse will focus their brains' resources on survival and responding to threats in their environment. This chronic stimulation of the brain's fear response means that the regions of the brain involved in this response are frequently activated (Perry, 2001a). Other regions of the brain, such as those involved in complex thought and abstract cognition, are less frequently activated, and the child becomes less competent at processing this type of information.
One way that early maltreatment experiences may alter a child's ability to interact positively with others is by altering brain neurochemical balance. Research on children who suffered early emotional abuse or severe deprivation indicates that such maltreatment may permanently alter the brain's ability to use serotonin, which helps produce feelings of well-being and emotional stability.
Agree with this. It's obvious that children can still develop good relationships with abusive parents. That is hardly indicative of the ideal cir stance, however, and you cannot say that the child wouldn't have been better adapted at an earlier age without said punishment, because we have volumes of evidence indicating otherwise.I've already conceded that hitting a kid creates negative associations for the parent. But it also creates negative associations with the behavior. If it didn't, then reinforcement wouldn't work either. Balancing out punishment with positive activities is how a parent maintains a good reputation with their kids. Even if you never hit your kid, if all you do is punish them, they won't like you. But as you can see, many of us who had parents who hit us still have great relationships with them.
Yes. It creates an aversion through a fear response. It inhibits learning and rational thought development, and cripples the frontal lobe's ability to process high-level information. Spanking a kid once will not destroy their life -- it's just an ineffective, inefficient way of parenting. Even you yourself say it's important to have a discussion afterward. Why is that? If the punishment is fine for learning then you shouldn't need to even speak to them, they should just know! The truth is that it's the discussion afterward that actively fires the neurons in their brain to connect the behavior with the situation.I think we all agree that it's important to talk to your kids and explain any punishment you give them. I honestly think the moment a parent loses control is when they start saying things like, "Because I said so." Kids don't learn anything from statements like that. Hitting doesn't teach right from wrong; it creates an aversion to certain things. Parents still have to parent.
The state can get involved and press assault charges when an adult punches another adult. I'm ok with it and I'm ok with harsher charges for parents beating on their kids.
I don't disagree again but there is no way state is not involved.. topic is slippery but saying it's a family business don't look too much into it is not an adequate answer.
So for good or bad, State / Police need to do their job starting by protecting the most needed..children
And before anyone goes there (because it inevitably is said), yes, I do think it's better parenting to smack a child on the ass occasionally and talk to them about the reasons for it versus not disciplining children at all. Extremes with kids are never good, whether it be too harsh of a discipline or too mild/nonexistent. Kids need boundaries but those can absolutely be taught without raising a hand to them.
So you should go back to school.
http://psychology.about.com/od/opera...punishment.htm
"Positive" and "negative" do not mean "good" and "bad". They refer to whether something is added or subtracted. Positive reinforcement means giving something good to reinforce behavior. Negative reinforcement is taking away something bad to reinforce behavior. Positive punishment is adding something bad to discourage behavior, and negative punishment is taking away something good to discourage behavior.Negative punishment is an important concept in B. F. Skinner's theory ofoperant conditioning. In behavioral psychology, the goal of punishment is to decrease the behavior that precedes it. In the case of negative punishment, it involves taking something good or desirable away in order to reduce the occurrence of a particular behavior.
Psychobabble again. I'm sure you're coming from a good place, and to a large extent, I agree with your intent. But it's just not true that pain doesn't force learning. I mean, what did you do when you were getting your degree if you didn't ;earn about conditioning (the actual math, not the short version we're talking about here)?Let's be really clear here: We aren't talking about a papercut. We aren't talking about falling and scraping a knee. A hand on a 350 degree oven is instant, overwhelming pain, especially to a 4 year old who hasn't developed the tools to rationalize what's happening. If you don't think a 4 year old goes into instant self-preservation mode the second he feels that heat, I don't know what to say. You're just wrong. When you abuse a child, you (hopefully) aren't burning them, but you're still putting them in that place of fear. Conditioning to that extent works PRECISELY because the subject is AFRAID of what will happen. Not because they're learning the what and why of the situation. It's an off switch. OVEN BAD. Neurotransmitters have already changed.
Dude, we all agree abuse is bad. That quote says nothing about general corporal punishment. In fact, it implies that all types of abuse are equal.This research from Healy, 2004.
Still waiting for something against corporal punishment.Agree with this. It's obvious that children can still develop good relationships with abusive parents. That is hardly indicative of the ideal cir stance, however, and you cannot say that the child wouldn't have been better adapted at an earlier age without said punishment, because we have volumes of evidence indicating otherwise.
Punishment is necessary for learning in a Pavlovian sense. But you still need to explain things to kids to get them to think rationally on issues, so you don't have to keep punishing them. The discussion by itself won't do anything, especially initially, since there's no reason for a kid to care if nothing bad happens to them. It takes both punishment and reinforcement to curb behavior in the right direction.Yes. It creates an aversion through a fear response. It inhibits learning and rational thought development, and cripples the frontal lobe's ability to process high-level information. Spanking a kid once will not destroy their life -- it's just an ineffective, inefficient way of parenting. Even you yourself say it's important to have a discussion afterward. Why is that? If the punishment is fine for learning then you shouldn't need to even speak to them, they should just know! The truth is that it's the discussion afterward that actively fires the neurons in their brain to connect the behavior with the situation.
The only time i spanked my kid was when she was 2 and it was during a tantrum trying to get her in her car seat. And even then, it was just patting her leg to get her to chill the out so I could click the belt.
Parents that have a premeditated notion to get a tree branch and take a kid to a torture room to teach them a lesson should absolutely be thrown in jail.
My mistake. We did not use that term at my university. It was "positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, and punishment".
I'm aware of the meanings of positive and negative, thank you."Positive" and "negative" do not mean "good" and "bad". They refer to whether something is added or subtracted. Positive reinforcement means giving something good to reinforce behavior. Negative reinforcement is taking away something bad to reinforce behavior. Positive punishment is adding something bad to discourage behavior, and negative punishment is taking away something good to discourage behavior.
You can't hand wave away what I'm saying by commenting that it's psychobabble. Fear response is absolutely a learned response, however when it's active it inhibits other forms of learning. A kid who burns his hand on the stove isn't going to LEARN anything other than that absolutely basic fear response. Pain does not evoke higher level (frontal lobe) learning, which is what you are attempting to stimulate when you're talking to your children about good and bad behaviors. Pain and fear force a subject into a state of heightened awareness, which uses a primary focus of self-preservation to guide behavior. It increases impulsive behaviors and inhibits self-control.Psychobabble again. I'm sure you're coming from a good place, and to a large extent, I agree with your intent. But it's just not true that pain doesn't force learning. I mean, what did you do when you were getting your degree if you didn't ;earn about conditioning (the actual math, not the short version we're talking about here)?
http://www.denverpost.com/lifestyles...rm-experts-sayDude, we all agree abuse is bad. That quote says nothing about general corporal punishment. In fact, it implies that all types of abuse are equal.
Still waiting for something against corporal punishment.
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releas.../spanking.aspx
Literally 2 seconds on a google search. Want more? I can give you dozens of peer reviewed papers on this subject. You're absolutely, 100% wrong. Period. You aren't arguing with me on this subject, you're arguing with millions of hours worth of research on the topic. The above is from a meta-analysis of 88 papers.While the nature of the analyses prohibits causally linking corporal punishment with the child behaviors, Gershoff also summarizes a large body of literature on parenting that suggests why corporal punishment may actually cause negative outcomes for children. For one, corporal punishment on its own does not teach children right from wrong. Secondly, although it makes children afraid to disobey when parents are present, when parents are not present to administer the punishment those same children will misbehave.
Much of the time a Pavlovian response is not even consciously learned. It is called operant conditioning in that the learning is automatic and non-conscious. So you're trying to teach your kids something they aren't even aware of.Punishment is necessary for learning in a Pavlovian sense.
Completely disagree. For starters, upsetting your parents is definitely an adversive stimulus, particularly if it carries the future potential for negative repercussions. Kids care because they care about their parents and want their approval. Punishment is completely unnecessary if the parent is using proper reinforcement techniques, as outlined above.The discussion by itself won't do anything, especially initially, since there's no reason for a kid to care if nothing bad happens to them. It takes both punishment and reinforcement to curb behavior in the right direction.
Simple question for those that believe in spanking (which I do):
If you tasked someone with watching your child and gave them the authority to spank your child/discipline them (whether it's an uncle/aunt or grandma/grandpa or family friend, ect..) and you saw this, would you be ok with it?
If they explained what the child did wrong to you and why they felt the need to discipline the child and didn't appear angry but legitmately were trying to be a good guardian, would you be ok?
would you be cool with being that guardian and spanking another person's kids?
I'm glad you are. Hopefully, you won't say something like this again:
"There is no 'positive punishment' in Psychology, and guess why that is? Because punishment does not alter behavior in a positive way."
I can certainly hand-wave you disregarding subconscious learning. You don't have to rationalize things to avoid doing them. That's why punishment is necessary, especially when a kid is too young to think clearly. Don't be overly humanistic: We're still animals and learn in very similar ways. The reason why a person who hurts their leg limps is because it hurts too much to put full weight on their leg, not because they're scared of it. Pain is just a part of life, and there usually aren't deep-seeded psychological issues going on every time someone experiences it.You can't hand wave away what I'm saying by commenting that it's psychobabble. Fear response is absolutely a learned response, however when it's active it inhibits other forms of learning. A kid who burns his hand on the stove isn't going to LEARN anything other than that absolutely basic fear response. Pain does not evoke higher level (frontal lobe) learning, which is what you are attempting to stimulate when you're talking to your children about good and bad behaviors. Pain and fear force a subject into a state of heightened awareness, which uses a primary focus of self-preservation to guide behavior. It increases impulsive behaviors and inhibits self-control.
Yeah, I'd much rather read an actually study than an agenda'd meta-analysis. Even the article you posted about the analysis had a dissenting view that was pretty much what I've been saying this whole time: That the studies focused on abuse, not corporal punishment in general, and were thusly biased.Literally 2 seconds on a google search. Want more? I can give you dozens of peer reviewed papers on this subject. You're absolutely, 100% wrong. Period. You aren't arguing with me on this subject, you're arguing with millions of hours worth of research on the topic. The above is from a meta-analysis of 88 papers.
Yep.Much of the time a Pavlovian response is not even consciously learned. It is called operant conditioning in that the learning is automatic and non-conscious. So you're trying to teach your kids something they aren't even aware of.
"Negative repercussions" are aspects of punishment. You can't get around it. You just keep trying to relabel it as "negative reinforcement", thereby completely mischaracterizing the debate. Reinforcement encourages behavior while punishment discourages it. If you seriously are trying to assert that parents can (and should) raise their kids while never discouraging bad behavior, then I think you're being disingenuous, and almost certainly hypocritical if you've had young kids at all.Completely disagree. For starters, upsetting your parents is definitely an adversive stimulus, particularly if it carries the future potential for negative repercussions. Kids care because they care about their parents and want their approval. Punishment is completely unnecessary if the parent is using proper reinforcement techniques, as outlined above.
What's the point of that question? It's almost unanimous here than Peterson went over the line. It's like asking if we'd be okay with a guardian locking our kid in the cellar for two weeks because we invested the guardian with the power to ground the kid.
Yes. And I have. My nieces and nephews. My brothers were fine with it.
It was for the people who might think the punishment is ok. Not a majority, but there are people defending AP (not just here, but in general).
Not sure if my pops were alive and I was a child that he would be a free man. I was disciplined very harshly on occasion and well, what would probably be construed as "abuse" these days. He broke a bamboo reed over my back one time in front of my friends. It was due to the fact that I told him to f#$k off when he was attempting to get me to submit to his idea of what a child born of his ethnic background should be. It was one of the most painful things I've ever been witness to and my friends (those that still remain from that day...) continue to bring that day up when we reminisce.
that's more responsibility than I care to take on, imo
Yeah, that seems odd--not sure if I would feel comfortable physically disciplining my niece and my nephew. I scold them verbally at times and educate them on their actions, but overall disciplining in the spanking sense would not be my forte.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
