Arcane?

It's a way of asking if it is outdated or forgotten in its reason it existed. That's not the direct dictionary term, but that's basically what using it means.

Which is why psychology has long ago determined punishments and negative reinforcements are the least effective forms of long-term behavioral correction. It only causes reliable short-term correction (though it is usually faster in the short-term than positive reinforcement).

So the real question is what are you trying to achieve?

I'd argue a use of positive reinforcement and negative reinforcements is best. When a child beats someone up at school? Tan their hide with a belt. When they get good grades or make it on the school football/debate/whatever team? Take them out as a congrats or something. Use of too much of one or the other both causes a negative. Too much cushy parenting can make your kid a weenie, too much discipline can make your child a train wreck. Much like the topic of obesity, moderation is the key.

Sorry, but because my mind has been poisoned by certain professors...

negative reinforcement != punishment

Nagging is an example of negative reinforcement. tanning someone's hide is a punishment.

Negative reinforcement is superior to punishment long-term IIRC.

I know, that's what I meant. I just didn't know if 'negative repercussion' or 'negative reinforcement' would be the most appropriate answer.

Believe me, there will be times where you have to make yourself not hit them

I am all for corporal punishment. Discipline (not a bad thing) is instilled by fear. Fear of pain is great motivator There is a reason for the old adage, "Spare the rod, spoil the child." It is true. Adversely, shunning was great motivator, too, in its time. No violence involved, though the psychological beating was great. Communities are too huge for this to work now, though. Just imagine being ignored by everyone you knew.

All of these new "psychological experts" that want to put their stamp on the human condition, are frauds. Human beings have been around for how long? I think we have figured out the "best way" to do things by now, with technological exceptions.

To me, that is the whole key to it all.

Thank you for expressing my thoughts about current psychologists opinions on the matter so eloquently. My response was just going to be "Meh, I entirely disagree, those guys are morons". LOL. Your way sounds way better

situational. I got spanked a couple times, but that was rare. my mom mostly threatened violence and infanticide, she loved saying "if you do X im going to kick your ass around the house" and once after skipping school in the 3rd grade for like the 7th time my mom came home and literally did kick my ass around the house while i was scooting around to get away. Not very hard, less painful than spanking actually.

I sure as hell learned to be a better liar and not leave evidence from those experiences, but if i were a normal person it would have tought me discipline.

usually my punishment was getting grounded from video games.

I think its pretty garbage logic to assume we have everything right. It makes it sound like there is some... final set of moral standards to be imposed on everyone. As though tradition is correct simply because its tradition. Complete and utter garbage. Now I could see an argument for why you believe psychologists are wrong, but using that as the logical basis? Pure misinformation. Even if we have found the correct behavior the only way to know for sure is studying it to confirm it is in fact the right one. There has been plenty of times in modern history where peoples personal anecdotal history is foisted up as the answer. It often turns out to be quite devastating. Ukraine was ours before, so therefore it will always be ours. So attacking it isn't taking it, but liberating it. North America belonged to natives first so it is ours, so therefore we can attack people to take it back.

The way of sepku for honor was the correct way in society, so therefore committing suicide for my lord is correct. Surely because it is the current enforced standard means it is the correct one. I could think of many more examples that are recent. http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/43-appeal-to-tradition

Meh, for me, while I did quote AlBQuirky, I was just applying his statement strictly in terms of the OP. Beyond that, nah, I agree, we probably still have a lot of things wrong, but as far as I'm concerned, Corporal punishment is not one of them.

There was just a study released of this subject here in Finland the other day: only fifteen percent of people accept it anymore. I for one see it as a positive development.

One time my mom was talking about child psychologists and said "those yahoos go to college and think they know more than me, a mom of six kids. "

For the most part in the vast majority of situations I think that no it is useless. However there are always exceptions to the rule. It's sad to say but to a certain extent there do seem to be some kids that respond better to it. I would imagine it would be a very rare occurrence, but there are almost always exceptions. Still in any long term capacity it would be useless.

Should stay banned I think, except for at home. Though obviously not too excessive, light smacking is all that should be allowed. If you have people in authority positions smacking/caning kids, then why not do that to advlts?

Because advlts think differently from children.

So? Mentally challenged advlts think differently. Should we use corporal punishment on advlts with low mental ages?

And that doesn't really hold up, so when someone reaches 18 and they still backchat people that just becomes rude and accepted and no longer punished, whereas if they were younger that is worthy of being physically punished?

Don't be silly. I'm not talking about outliers with developmental delays. advlts don't put up with corporal punishment as their cognitive abilities are more advanced and have past experience that guides their behavior. Children are more susceptible to learning behavior and are still developing their abstract thinking capabilities. Have you ever seen how advlts and children are taught? It's like night and day.

That doesn't make it right though.

So what? What's right? No one needs paternalism in our lives.

I think corporal punishment is neither effective nor a subject of secret or mysterious knowledge. Cover your tracks all you like, you obviously don't know what "arcane" means...

My mother will hit my nephews if they are causing trouble. As for me, I have no trouble keeping them under control without doing that. I think corporal punishment is for people who are unable or unwilling to use other methods (basically being able to convince or dominate through your intellect or personality). It's a bad option, but some people just can't do any better. Sad.

Now when my nephews hit each other, she has no moral standing to criticize them for it. And in the long run, they will resent her, but not me.

A mix of negative and positive reinforcement is really the best middle ground. I'm not a parent nor do I really work with kids, so I can't be considered an expert on this. I just know extremes are never that good.