Spanking children

[AFPheonix]

So then please explain why that particular line of reasoning is valid to you, but the other instances in which I applied the same reasoning are all of a sudden strawmen.

[Slytovhand]

Aaarghhh... I only thought of this tonight, and it was pretty obvious!

Firstly, the line of argument that we're heading towards OT, should really be in the 'Bad Arguments' thread, cos that's what's really going on here.

But, since we're already on here, I'll throw it in here...

'Scientific Method'... is completely irrelevant to this discussion.

There is a whole stack of different ways a question can be asked, as in what is implied.

Is it a question relating to directions or method? As in, "How do you change a lightbulb?" - follow the instrucitons in order).

Questions of personal preference - "Do you prefer chocolate or vanilla?"

Questions of imperative - "Which is faster, V6 or V8?"

And, of course, questions of morality - "Is the death penalty good for society?". These wonderful little buggers have the added presumption built in somewhere - that either morals are Absolute (and thus there is a definite - even if unknown - correct or incorrect answer), or they are Relative (no definite correct or incorrect - it all depends and can change relevant to time, culture, society, etc).


This here question (of spanking children) comes to us from either the moralistic, the personal preferance or the imperative line. The best you can hope for as far as previous posts, is "Is spanking an effective method for disciplining children?". If you even try to go with 'scientific method' for arguing for or against, you completely lose any type of control subjects. So there is only personal and anecdotal experience to come into play...which hardly counts given the 6 billion people on the planet to compare to your 2,3 or even 20 people that you've known. Let alone having any idea on how that person would have turned out anyway...

If it's moralistic - well, it has no relevance at all. And all opinions are valid (although, those who have studied morals might be slightly more of an authority - but only because they've looked at the question more in depth).

Personal preference then? Hey - no-one is more of an authority on what I want than me... so my opinion is valid

(did I forget anything??)


Slyt

[Zyanya]

So then please explain why that particular line of reasoning is valid to you, but the other instances in which I applied the same reasoning are all of a sudden strawmen.

Did. Read.

[AFPheonix]

No, you're explanation was more along the lines of "if your opinion is not the 'right' opinion, then it's not valid." You seem to be ok with people who have no experience in a particular field yet still agree with you.

Look, I don't have a problem with spanking. Some people do and seem to bring up children perfectly fine without it. There's also parents who do or don't spank and their kids are hellions. In which case, I would think that perhaps it's not the spanking or lack of it that is at fault, it's the ability of the parent to outwit the child.

There really is more than one way to skin a cat.

[crazylegs]

A theory is worth more than a hypothesis because it is tested and thus more likely to be true.

Therefore the opinion of someone who has actual experience in the matter and thus is offering a theory is more valid than the opinion of someone who has just thought about it and made some casual observations and thus has a hypothesis.


Thus, as I said earlier - an opinion with no experience in the matter isn't worth very much.

And - it is interesting to note the strong tendency of parents who raise good kids to be supportive of the act of spanking a child.

A theory is only as such until such time as it is disproven, I have given three examples (very high publicity ones) where their opinion on childcare is not valid yet they are parents.

[Zyanya]

A theory is only as such until such time as it is disproven, I have given three examples (very high publicity ones) where their opinion on childcare is not valid yet they are parents.

Does that actually change what I said?

In the cases you cited, their opinions are completely worthless because they aren't being responsible for a child. The exact opposite, in fact, which is why their activities showed up in the news.

You seem to be ok with people who have no experience in a particular field yet still agree with you.

You seem to be adept at making things up.

[AFPheonix]

You didn't seem to have a problem with the people who don't have kids yet are ok with spanking. Am I making that up?

[crazylegs]

In the cases you cited, their opinions are completely worthless because they aren't being responsible for a child.

They were responsible for the child(ren), which is why they were able to act how they did, random laymen wouldn't have been able to abuse the authority and trust.

The people cited all *thought* that what they were doing was right, or proper; it was their opinion. Although we (as a society as a whole) can see that what they were doing was wrong they could not.

They have an opinion and (in theory) could debate about the rights and wrongs of it, to write off others opinions because they do not fit into narrow bands is dangerous.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Also, everyone was at some point a child, so can state how their parents discliplined them, and whether or not it had any effect on them.

My parents smacked me and my brothers til we became of an age where losing privileges or being grounded had a better effect. The smacking was a very last resort, and only meted out when necessary; however, my brothers and I all had the greatest of respect for our parents; something which a lot of kids don't seem to have. It's that, I think, that's the difference between a well behaved child and a little demon spawn.

[Zyanya]

You didn't seem to have a problem with the people who don't have kids yet are ok with spanking. Am I making that up?.

Yes. However, I am not going to argue with the people who don't have children and are okay with spanking because there is no reason for me to do so. They managed to pick the correct hypothesis, any experience they gain will only support it.

They were responsible for the child(ren), which is why they were able to act how they did, random laymen wouldn't have been able to abuse the authority and trust.

No, they were supposed to be responsible for the wellbeing of the children and failed in that responsibility. Just like a junkie who lets her kids run wild in the street isn't being responsible for them, even though she should be.

And learn the difference between a spanking and a beating. It's on par with the difference between telling your kid 'no, you can't have a candy bar' and starving the kid to death.

[CancelMyService]

One thing that I've noticed every time a spanking debate pops up on any board I've ever been to: The anti-spanking crowd will almost always descend to the "any physical contact with a child is a horrible abuse on par with murder" argument that kind of undermines any valid points they may have. It's like a version of Godwin's Law, only with "OMG ABUSE" instead of Hitler.

The reason it bothers me is the mindset that any kind of spanking equals abuse is the main reason we have the "demon spawn kids threatening to call child services when parents threaten to discipline" attitude.

I mean, yes, there are obviously cases of child abuse that are horrible, but I don't think any reasonable person would consider the rare spanking or even a slap in the mouth for backtalk as an abusive situation.

[crazylegs]

And learn the difference between a spanking and a beating. It's on par with the difference between telling your kid 'no, you can't have a candy bar' and starving the kid to death.

Having removed children under a Police Protection Order due to physical abuse I am fully aware of the difference thank you.

[Lace Neil Singer]

I mean, yes, there are obviously cases of child abuse that are horrible, but I don't think any reasonable person would consider the rare spanking or even a slap in the mouth for backtalk as an abusive situation.

Especially since any parents who are going to beat their kids senseless will do so regardless of laws put in place about smacking. All those laws do is make sure that parents who are just going to deal out clips around the ear or smacks on the legs get penalised. Oh dear, my dad gave me a smack when I was seven cuz I pushed my little brother down the stairs... I should be traumatised for life!

[Zyanya]

Having removed children under a Police Protection Order due to physical abuse I am fully aware of the difference thank you.

Obviously not, as you insist on bringing them up together, such as bringing up horrific cases of abuse in a thread about spanking. And you tried to justify horrible abuse by comparing it to spanking with 'but the parents there thought it was okay'.

Learn the difference. Or get out of the debate until you do, cause if you think my smacking my son's hand is anywhere comparable to what these people did to their children I've got no time or respect for you.

[the_std]

Crazylegs has said, more than once, that he SUPPORTS spanking. He is in favour of spanking has a disciplinary method.

He's trying to point out that there are other opinions out there besides yours, and that other opinions besides yours or the ones you deem worthy are valid.

Just because someone's a shitty parent doesn't make them any less of a parent. Just like a shitty teacher is still a teacher.