Hey: Is it alright for parents to use physical punishment? Are there other forms that you might disagree with more?
I actually like this subject a lot because a lot of us come from different back grounds. Im interested to see what everyone thinks
Hey: Is it alright for parents to use physical punishment? Are there other forms that you might disagree with more?
I actually like this subject a lot because a lot of us come from different back grounds. Im interested to see what everyone thinks
We are actually learning Freudian Psychology in my English class and my answer would be no. For those who are unfamiliar, the mind as Freud has split it up consists of three parts:
The Ego: Your outmost personality which interacts with the world based on your values within the other two parts.
The ID: Your innermost, uncensored, and uncontrolled desires.
The Super-Ego: The discipline principle.
When you are younger, the super-ego is shaped by your parents, the people in your life who teach you their views of common sense and morality. Eventually you might develope an "Object Choice" in which you try to model your super-ego on someone else you look up too, but usually your parents are the more major piece of the puzzle.
The parents who spare the rod but spoil the child with no consequences for the child's negative actions are unable to raise a child (by their own accord) that knows morality. Meanwhile a parent who is too harsh will raise a child that despises the world and it's rules, making them just as bad, if not worse than the spoiled child.
Physical means of discipline (from my perspective) does not offer the necessary moral lessons from the parent on exactly why the action was wrong, but instead instills a fear of physical pain in the child, teaching them nothing.
In my opinion, physical punishment is not the way to go, but parents should instead teach the reason why it is wrong after the fact, and even better, before the negative action even happens. This will lead to a more well rounded and sensible super-ego that can properly negotiate with the ego and the outside world, as well as create a proper balance with the opposing ID impulses that drive the child to make their choices.
Oh. my. god.
that was beautiful.
Interesting! I do remembering learning much of the same in my psychology classes.
Personally, I do not think that violence is a way to teach children. I remember getting smacked as a child, only by my father, and then being terrified of him for the next couple of days. Fear is not a way to teach children. It impacts them in the future. I know for myself I have a knee-jerk reaction to cover my face any time I hear a man yelling, as if preparing for the punishment. This is not healthy behavior and I have worked for many years to stop it.
(Being Hispanic I have an irrational fear of the chancla. But that is more of a joke within our culture these days. lol)
Children are impressionable, if you treat them with respect and take the time to teach them life lessons they won't be monsters, but little people willing to learn and are good.
Very true. Still, do you think that the Bible is relevant to nowadays? I do.
To answer what both you and @A-n-x-i-e-t-y have said, I offer this:
Homosexuality in the Bible: What @A-n-x-i-e-t-y has said is true. A lot of the common bible verses associated with the justification of homophobia are often not referenced in a correct context. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah are not against homosexuality, but in fact rape. Certain versions of the story don't even specify the sex (or gender) of the angel visitors, or even if they were angels at all. Another commonly used verse is "Man shall not lie with man" (Leviticus 18:6) which has been used for the same argument, however, research of the original text has shown that this verse is mistranslated, and should read as: "Man shall not lay with boy", which is to promote anti-pedophilia. Many others exist too, but many of these other verses used as "proof" gods hates gays are in the context of other religions having homosexual ritualism, such as ancient Greece. As all Christians know, it is a sin to worship "idols" (gods or godesses other than the Judeo-Christian God), and this is shaming homosexuality in the name of another god, i.e. an idol, not homosexuality in a general context.
The Bible's relevance: The bible is very much still relevant in today's society to Christians. It does have some decent lessons and is nonetheless, the primary holy text of most Christian branches. However, as mentioned above, there are some verses and chapters taken way out of context when read. There are also plenty of verses that teach things that are considered horrible in modern society. One should not cherry pick, and one should also not use the excuse "it was okay back then". It has never been okay to modern people, and even societies of the past, but we can learn from our mistakes. That is what history is for.
Interesting! I do remembering learning much of the same in my psychology classes.
Personally, I do not think that violence is a way to teach children. I remember getting smacked as a child, only by my father, and then being terrified of him for the next couple of days. Fear is not a way to teach children. It impacts them in the future. I know for myself I have a knee-jerk reaction to cover my face any time I hear a man yelling, as if preparing for the punishment. This is not healthy behavior and I have worked for many years to stop it.
(
Being Hispanic I have an irrational fear of the chancla. But that is more of a joke within our culture these days. lol)Children are impressionable, if you treat them with respect and take the time to teach them life lessons they won't be monsters, but little people willing to learn and are good.
I myself also have a similar response. I tend to tense up and am unconciously prepared to block a hit when being yelled at due to being hit across the face before. When I was little, I would hide from my father after being hit. Even being yelled at to this day by him (or my mother) makes me feel very uncomfortable because I have a fear of disappointing others, and I still have that tendency of going into a "fight (or in this case block) or flight" sort of response.
I'm just curious are you an only child or the eldest?
I'm just curious are you an only child or the eldest?
I am the youngest of three siblings.
Oh dang, then my hypothesis was way off.
Most children with experiences similar to ours are generally the oldest or are an only child. Similar to the 'Oldest Child Syndrome', parents will treat the oldest/only child harsher and push them to be more perfect. Generally this includes harsher and physical punishment. Where as younger children are treated differently. (Just an interesting study I read once. Obviously it is not 100% infallible)
Family dynamics are weird.
I mean in my experience, maybe things like being spanked are justified to a certain age, but as the oldest child I had a lot of the worse punishments tested on me. My mom used to force my dad to beat me so I would associate both my parents with pain and punishment, though the worst I got was the belt when my friend’s little sister hacked my social media and posted a bunch of swearing when I was 12. But compared to my sisters, they’ve never been physically punished, and in some small way I feel that may have been detrimental. The only physical punishment I can think of being okay is being spanked, but only when the child is younger than 8. After that, being grounded should be a go to, but unless that’s enforced it won’t work as discipline. I personally have experienced many forms of disciple, whether it being forced to write out “I am not special” 100 times by a teacher or my mother forcing me to wear and look however she wanted, and most have created severe negative mental effects that have really helped me see that my “punishments” were often brutally unnecessary
Hey: Is it alright for parents to use physical punishment? Are there other forms that you might disagree with more?
I actually like this subject a lot because a lot of us come from different back grounds. Im interested to see what everyone thinks
Ethnic background kids who got beat buddies!
Also I think Freud was an idiot because of sex.
Oh dang, then my hypothesis was way off.
Most children with experiences similar to ours are generally the oldest or are an only child. Similar to the 'Oldest Child Syndrome', parents will treat the oldest/only child harsher and push them to be more perfect. Generally this includes harsher and physical punishment. Where as younger children are treated differently. (Just an interesting study I read once. Obviously it is not 100% infallible)
Family dynamics are weird.
There is a reason. My brother was a great kid, even with family problems. Then came my sister, we don't talk about her. My theory is that my parents are trying to keep me from being my sister, but their way of doing so is not helping.
Oh dang, then my hypothesis was way off.
Most children with experiences similar to ours are generally the oldest or are an only child. Similar to the 'Oldest Child Syndrome', parents will treat the oldest/only child harsher and push them to be more perfect. Generally this includes harsher and physical punishment. Where as younger children are treated differently. (Just an interesting study I read once. Obviously it is not 100% infallible)
Family dynamics are weird.
There is a reason. My brother was a great kid, even with family problems. Then came my sister, we don't talk about her. My theory is that my parents are trying to keep me from being my sister, but their way of doing so is not helping.
I'm not saying I am becoming like her, it's just my parents are going about the wrong way. (In my opinion.)
Also I think Freud was an idiot because of sex.
Freud did have flaws to his argument. His idea of object choice was sexist. It involved women picking a man as her object choice because of jealousy of the male's sex organs.
But like everything was about sex in his book.
But like everything was about sex in his book.
We never read the book, just his paper. I wouldn't know.
But like everything was about sex in his book.
We never read the book, just his paper. I wouldn't know.
Now that I think about it (I had this pointed out to me), are you referring to the many times he used the word "sexual" during the course of Freud's writing on psychology? Most of the times he uses that terminology, he is not being literal about the "sexual" natures of the human mind. It's just his way of saying the "instinctual" parts of the mind.
He also based a lot of his psychology on Oedipus.
He based a lot of his psychology on the greek way of living and perception on life and instincts.
He also based a lot of his psychology on Oedipus.
I know, I'm just saying some of the terminology is weird and not literal. Also yes, Eris summed that up for me perfectly. I need to stop writing essays on notebook.
No no no! We enjoy the essays!
No no no! We enjoy the essays!
Well, thank you Eris.
Eris is correct. Essays can be quite enjoyable.
Indeed.