Modern-Day No Spanking

Why against spanking (now)?

Intuition

Why Timely?

Spanking was largely seen as a reasonable things to do back in the day given the situational context of lack of knowledge. It's similar to how a child learns thru trial and error.

Reasons:

"I was hit and I turned out fine" or "I was hit and suffer from a psychological condition known as "respect for others""

could you have been a better person if you weren't hit?

To the pro spanker: you are not perfect
To the pro spanker, be honest with yourself, there were times in life where you felt unsure and those times could be related back to the spanking

A thief that had their hand chopped off for stealing can theoretically say the same thing, thinking they deserved to get their hands cut off for stealing.
Basically the same thing as saying: I'm going to expect and wait till my son murders someone then I'll whip him, at that point the damage has already been done is the way you should see it.

waiting for the crime to take place, prevent it
Prevention is better than cure

A smart parent would prevent the desire from developing

Sure, at that time in moment, you can choose between the lesser of the two evils.
Best crime prevention is formal academic education and fostering curiosity not dogmatic boredom. This is what we mean by "get busy with life."

too much respect is a bad thing

This leads to overly relying in family for support, also known as attachment issues
is a form of trauma

Think of this as a form of unintentional side effects

against it because of the practical effects, such as decreased grey matter in brain, this makes it harder for children to learn new concepts, why do you think the children that are spanked end up average kids?

See this article for examples applied to other things: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/27/well/family/the-fallacy-of-the-i-turned-out-fine-argument.html
What does turned off fine even mean?

Even a person who was raped can still "turn out fine" 10 years later. That does not mean they didn't suffer with intrusive thoughts, misplaced emotions, decreased sense of intellectual curiosity, for the past number of years.
By using I turned out fine argument, you are invariably justifying many things, such as rape, or slavey just because the black today turned out fine even though their ancestors are unjustifiable slaves.

I could have a random person come up to you and slap you in the face, and 10 years down the line, you will still be fine as it would not have caused immense pain resulting in trauma, however, it undeniably affects your life in ways you may not realize, such as distracting your thought process, maybe you'll retain information less faster, more prone to being reactive.

Refer to studies of how influences matter and free will does not exist.
If they claim free will only exists for moral options, ask them why the logic only applies to moral "good" behaviors, which have no explanation for why they are good.
Curiosity and asking the right questions is what will win the anti-spanking debate (only spanking used as punishment)

What criteria applies to "fine?"

I can point out many things in your life that you can optimize at the moment, why does the boundary stop at hitting children?

There are many things in your life that subconsciously programmed you, similarly, there can be things that are wrong with you and you not being aware of it.

Cancer for example.

Spanking affects thing on a minute level.

Similarly to how placing phone in pocket can actually affect sex life due to reduced sperm count from radiation
Similarly to how you will likely still "turn out fine" if you stub your toe 10 years ago, but still is not acceptable.
Similar to how you will likely "turn out fine" if you eat food off the ground just once in your lifetime - does not make it the most optimal thing to do given other opportunities.
Who knows, years later, we may find that poor air quality index can impair moral judgement - that is a reasonable conclusion to make and it would make sense to improve this environmental factor as it is a minute change with a very overlooked not so obvious effect.
When we first observed the sun, no one knew that it would be responsible for our sleep wake circadian rhythm, similarly, no one knew the influence of air quality on asthma, which in turn has an effect on mental health.
Similar to how can certain colors trigger seizures or how can certain colors can trigger certain memories or moods, causing a person to act morally or immoral. This describes an enviornment used to sustain morality is the cause of moral behavior and immoral behavior. Furthermore, this shows the importance of enviornment in moral development.

Feeling fine or happy being stupid isn't a good thing, no matter if you feel good.

Same thing: Even if you feel good smoking or drinking alcohol, does not make it good for you.

I can say I stubbed my toe and turned out fine 10 years later, and thereby, all children should have their toes stubbed for the sake of it. That does not make it right.

Think about what a wild claim this would be and how they would be directly correlated: WTF? Spanking Young Children Makes Academically Successful Teenagers

Do not think of this as "wild," but rather look at it with an open mind.

Sure, we resorted this method in dire times, however, we know now that, generally, prevention is better than cure, and is it best to avoid situations where this would happen

It's no different than letting your son murder and then whipping him for it.
"Before we understood science, it was natural to believe that God created the universe, but now science offers a more convincing explanation"
Same thing as deciding not to put son in a temptation environment, such as not putting son in a strip club, not allowing schools to be build near strip clubs

Spanking has no specific goal, and we know that when we don't have a specific goal, all goes to shit.
Spanking is correlated with a lack of ability to pursue curiosity optimally
"Spanking teaches self-control" where one must limit their desires to see the bigger goal

You can teach them this thru practical reasons instead of hitting them. You are usually not in an emergency situation where you need to hit them in order to save them, like slapping someone's ass to prevent getting stung by a wasp that was already there.
By not caring about the reason why because it morally does not matter, you are ignoring the practical factors that caused the situation to happen and potential ways to mitigated instead of teaching self-control. It's similar to getting mad at daughter for being raped and blaming her for not having enough self-control to wear less revealing clothing on the beach.

Spanking was justified "back then"

early conclusion

Non-verbal communication between parent and child told child they are allowed to do the thing they have done "wrong"

Non-verbal communication (unspoken communication) is just as important as verbal communication, by exposing children to environment without pre-warnings like construction workers do, they fall victim to thinking they don't need guidance. All a person needed at that age was someone to be by their side for a day guiding them on what to and not to do, and it wouldn't take hitting someone to do that to learn self-control without messing up their intellectual mental actions.

Environmental influences play a bigger role than influences in the home
Scientists are just those who study the environment by regulating themselves.

Spanking shows that parents indirectly allowed that behavior to continue by not effectively addressing it to begin with.
Similar to learning of unspoken rule

Proactive parenting not reactive parenting - we don't punish criminals before they commit a crime, only after.

Example: In the same way we knowingly don't expose our children to porn because we know and expect them to become hooked or addicted to it, same thing with putting them in an environment with new things, we should expect that they would need to learn self control before they go into a place and when they fail, you teach them practically by taking one of their things away
Same example, just less extreme: in the same way, we don't expose children to high voltage outlets, hell we don't even let adults go there without protection, same thing can be said about children, we shouldn't expose them with things they aren't ready to see without the proper self-control, this is called proactive parenting, expecting when their children will commit crimes to proactively prevent it. Same logic works on children as well.
teach them practical morality

Spanking teaches curiosity is bad, and the more you limit curiosity in the presence of their experience, the less curious they are and tend to not perform as well academically, this is shown by how the south is behind in education.

Spanking decreases intellectual curiosity

Spanking can be used to teach morally right but can also be used to teach morally wrong things too. If someone would beat her and ask her to kill someone else because they beat her, she needs to know why that is wrong even if they beat her and refuse to kill said person just because they beat her. Just because you hit someone does not mean they are right and that is what spanking teachers, that some things are wrong because of dogma and practical pain inflicted and without practical reason as to why the world would be a better place if we didn't steal others' belongings.
Look at it from a kids' perspective (empathize), all they see is a shiny new thing and they are curious about it, whilst you know it's a wolf in sheep's skin, ideally you wouldn't expose your kid to these things, as it can create subtle forms of hidden trauma as those unexplained feelings are.

Yes, scientists don't pursue curiosity to the point of stealing others' belongings, but they do this by avoiding situations, not putting themselves in situations of temptation and actively trying resist it. This is why I am saying environment matters. Environment is a cause and a form of non-verbal communication, and free will does not exist

"Free Will Does Not Exist" See: cause of [intrusive] thoughts

The kid might see something being in their presence as something that is equivalent to shoving something in someone else's face. For example, what you see as a person shoving something in your face is equivalent as exposing a child to something new.

Your goal as a parent might be to desensitize a child to this, however, it can be done tactfully and intellectually with words without resorting to hitting someone.
Basically, the child sees being in an enviornment of new things and not being able to interact with it is like taunting them.

Is it wrong because you were hit or because it causes harm to another person that trusted you with their belonging in your presence?
"kids are amoral"

Human developed desires are complicated and more than just "amoral"

Possible future study: Spanking lowers HGH production and decreases height
Would you spank your child in front of a doctor?
Misconception about spanking is that it affects not only what you think it affects (expecting that toddlers can associate pain with wrongdoing), when in reality, it has many unintended side effects such as reduced grey matter, lack of academic comprehension. Perfect person is a scientist.

Why do you think all of the places that are vehemently pro-spanking have the worst test scores? Find stereotypes that outcast this.

Leads to more internal problems

You can't tell me that you didn't face internal second thoughts about random ideas

Children don't have malicious intent
don't want to be helpless
If it works so well why don't use it all the time? Even for minor, first-time infractions?
Human desires are complicated, and I want to spend the time to understand them.

This implies a lack of understanding children and of their desires apart from "pain can solve problems"

Most people aren't ready to have a kid, all people need is a dick and a vagina and they reproduce
It prevents children's confident in trying new things

This is where children get that shyness factor

It teaches children to stigmatize everything and stop thinking
Causes confusion, why is this bad?
Why are we born imperfectly?

why is evil possible?
why am I a human being?

Emphasize with children

Children "steal" things simply because they are curious, in reality, stealing is nothing but a social construct, nothing is technically owned by anyone.
Yes, curiosity does not justify theft, however, it is important to give children a place where they can freely explore their curiosity for hours on end, instead of taking them everywhere you go, this leads to less intellectual development being in an environment where they can't practice curiosity.

Same way you wouldn't bring children to a strip club or a movie theater because they'll be too loud.

Putting children in places where you know they'll act up is like putting them in a strip club and getting mad at them for looking at the hookers. Looking is an interactive action too.

Spanking logic can be used to justify flogging of adults, when, in reality, we know there are better options for adults, sure, we can reason with them easier, however, this shows that it is the parent that cannot reason with the toddler because they forced another person to be in this world.
Same thing as you consciously not putting yourself in situations where you will feel tempted (like a strip club) or jealous, same thing can be applied to children.

Instead, what reasonably adults do is avoid places like that instead of being forced to be there and act like you're not tempted.
Avoiding problems

Cause of behavior is presence of environment. Sure, resilience and self-control are important, but it's smarter to avoid a problem than to create one and solve it.
"Idle hands are the devils workshop"

Give them something to do so they don't go worrying too much about the neighbors stuff
Look at it from their perspective (empathize with them), realize that they are just curious and are born with no malicious intent, rather that is learned and all feelings, including mental feelings can be explained, proving free will does not exist.
The best cure is prevention and the best prevention of bad things is to be worried about doing something good.

Put them in a place where they wouldn't have to practice dogmatism or something they don't understand

If they act up in a store, simply don't take them to the store, leave them at a place like daycare or gymnastics practice where they can practice their curiosity. This is what the upper-class parents do and they don't have to spank their kids, with all of the pro-spankers complaining about.

Spanking is just as much as "coddling" is as much as someone doesn't want murder to be legal

send your kids off to a private school instead of a public one because I know there are bad influences there.

Family time isn't always a good thing

sometimes too much family time can take away from intellectual gains

It's not good to be in an area that does not foster intellectual concerns often, this depends on the goal, but if you want academically and intellectually smart children, you need to train as such.
Care to understand children's' behavior, if you did, you know the verbally communicating isn't the best way, rather showing them active preventive measure such as sports, etc. is much better.
Needing to spank is no different than putting your kid in a shit situation and getting "mad" at them for acting like shit, unless it was all planned out.

For example, when kids stole the things from neighbor, the mother should have expected her kids to be bored and do something about it like putting them in sports or some camps or something.

If your first time telling your child to do something is ineffective, that is your fault, not theirs

Basically, communicating with your child via words isn't effective, actions speak louder than words. In their perspective, it's nothing different than your boss telling you something in a light voice, and you interpreting it differently than what they intended it to since they spoke so softly and them getting mad at you for doing it differently and now they want to hit you.

If you have a cookie jar that your child steals from, maybe they aren't old enough to be exposed to the cookie jar temptation, like gold, keep it hidden in the bank or a vault somewhere. In their eyes, it's the gold, when they're older they can realize they should enjoy in moderation.

needing to spank is like putting a candy in a child's face and getting mad at them for being tempted to want to eat it. Think of mental actions.
It is basically an unnecessary temptation or an unnecessary experience.

Spanking decreases intellectual development
How do you teach your kids that stealing is "wrong" - meaning you can't objects that are not in your belonging without others' granted permission.

Wait until they're older to expose them to certain environments (see: movie theater example), then teach them by reasoning with them and if that does not work, take something of theirs away.
it's important to consider why kids are doing so and sympathize with their perspective.
Yes, stealing is wrong even if bored, but it's even more wrong to be bored, kids should be constantly engaged with something productive to do to engage their intellectual minds.

Spanking does not really teach right and wrong, nor does it remind someone of something. It merely disrupts their ability to learn from failure and look at a situation objectively, this decreasing intellectual capacity.
There are bad things in this world, certain bad things they shouldn't be exposed to regardless of age.

Such as a tobacco store, there is a reason why tobacco stores are not built nearby schools
Kids don't know what to avoid
Precaution
Sure, they still have to be moral in dire situations, but it'd be smarter to avoid those dire situations rather than have to face it.

Brain stimulation

I want to make my kid moral by proving brain stimulation

The fact that spanking is more common in areas with a lack of opportunity and education is clear to me why spanking is something that should be stopped.
Kids start exploring using trial and error
Don't be too worried about kids stealing. Stealing is wrong, sure, but you shouldn't be voluntarily putting yourself in tempting situations either. it's like avoiding going to the strip club, this is why strip clubs aren't placed nearby schools.

Addressing an act as "stealing" oversimplifies the intracies involved with the event. It fails to answer the question behind the chain of events leading to this event (otherwise known as the why). It's as if I drive into ditch then get out.

Being social is acceptable, however, being too socialabe is not.
The best way not to get tempted with something is to get busy with something else
Children are not distracted, they are merely curious, this is an unbiased way of looking at it without applying any sort of goal oriented words to it.

take your time doing something else in the meantime utilize your body some other way

Spanking takes effort to put into implying an unneutral position

movements can be measured by level of effort

It's up to the adult to make it make sense to a child

Sure, pain works, we all feel pain.

feelings are neither good nor bad
The human brain does not make sense sometimes

Making sense is what you expect the outcome to be - that is a bias merely based on past experiences, however, I do agree there is an objective standard to evaluate which arguments are more rational, however, in order to reach there, that itself takes time and patience and a calm environment to think of such thoughts.

Spanking for running in the street is no different than forcing your kid to a booby trapped home and getting mad at him for exploring it, the point is you should place your toddler in a place where it fosters curiosity, not endangers. Similar to how you plug up the outlets in the home, same logic applied here.
Risks are everywhere, the kid shouldn't have to take deathly risks such as living because of your selfishness.
I'd rather my child wake up to a world of possibilities
Instead of being moral in tempting situations, why not make it easier to be moral by completely avoiding those tempting situations.

It does not make sense to willfully go into a strip club and resist temptation, rather just completely avoid the place by taking a different route.
look at it from a kids' perspective, it's as if you're taking them to a tempting place voluntarily and expecting them to behave as otherwise.

It does not make sense to force someone into a moral dilemma and try to get them out of it by hitting them, it would make more sense to avoid that situation and fill your experiences in life with something else.
prevention by getting busy with something else

Similar to how a person can get over a breakup by doing things other than constantly pondering about.
In other words: Get busy with life, keep your kids busy - you wouldn't let your kid just sit around the house in the summertime, therefore, you shouldn't do the same when you're just "getting groceries" by leaving them at home, rather give them something to do.
kids need to be constantly engaged with something to do or else they will turn their curiosity to their everyday life

For example, instead of not letting your child draw on the wall, purchase a wall cover that allows them to draw on the walls without damaging the actual wall which is your concern, not only is this effective in letting them pursue their curiosity, but also practically balances your concerns of not damaging the wall.
Similar to how you wouldn't trust a child to run a desk job, same thing can be said about trusting a child with unblemished wall.

All it takes is knowing how a child's brain works on a relatively intricate level to understand the more complex things a parent must do in order to successfully raise intellectual and moral kids.

Provide them a place to be curious

Sports is the best preventative medicine and helps one encourage curiosity of body awareness.

Sure you may have been taught "respect" -> however, being too nice is also a bad thing. It shows you are (overly) reliant on others' morality and opinions.
Spanking does not truly work long-term based on how the brain works, don't oversimplify it.
In order to be moral you need to be in an environment which encourages morality, this is why you don't see protestors rallying against adult clubs

not all moral environments are the same

For example, an environment can be moral one second and immoral the next given that one person abuses another persons' trust, something that could be prevented.
A moral environment is not a immorally-tempting environment. This is why Church service is held in a chapel and not a strip club.

https://medium.com/the-post-grad-survival-guide/resist-temptation-by-changing-your-environment-a7b384617c32
This is also why it's harder to lose weight when being exposed to candy and what not, as it takes much resistance effort consciously, which wastes energy that you could be spending doing something else.

Similar to how you wouldn't hire an unable-bodied person for a job since you know they wouldn't have the mental fortitude to do so

This is why background checks are important as they ensure

Spanking stigmatizes mistakes, which doesn't lead to development as to why some things are bad, rather just knowing that they are. That is not very intellectual or academic.
(unconditional) Moral perfectionism is never possible

Everyone will fold if tortured enough

Ritualized spanking uses the same logic as those who are bad guys
Making sense of confusion
Spanking affects a person in ways they may not realize or comprehend

For example, if you were spanked you may be more vulnerable to forgetting things, etc. It can and will affect mental function in ways that are unnoted.

Spanking can cause social anxiety of being near people and can lead to unreasonable trust
following morality in desperate times isn't necessarily a good thing
Needing to use spanking is already descriptive of a situation that could be avoided.

Spanking does not take into consideration of the specific thought process used

Spanking teaches resiliency sure

Brain research says certain colors invoke certain feelings, this is why therapists offices are colored in light colors whereas arcades have many colors

Spanking hinders development of curiosity, creativity and critical thinking skills

This also inevitably has effects on other areas of life involving health. For example spanked people have a harder time dieting, sure, they may be considered mutually exclusive events, however, in life, everything affects everything, even things that don't make sense - that's just how the human brain works.

The logic here is - learned helplessness

Spanking affects children in ways that you may not expect that are related

For example, those who are spanked may tend to be less intellectually curious and more dogmatic leading to more intrusive thoughts
Similarly to how going to the gym makes one more academic even though it has no ideal relation, both actions do affect each other in the physical realm in terms of balance.
Everything affects everything, everything is inexplicably intertwined, it's just the way our ~~feelings~~ brain works: https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-everything-affects-everything-jay-asher-41-15-36.jpg

Spanking does not allow the child to realize that it is the environment that is the problem, not the child itself.

Sure, resiliency is important when facing adversaries, however, a child shouldn't be facing adversaries

If spanking really works, why don't we use it as a first resort?
Even if spanking is quick and "effective" in the short-term, the same logic can be used to justify chopping off a thieves hands off as they are caught in the act for petty theft - they are both "quick" and "effective" when considering the short-term.
Cause of thoughts is not free will
How the human body works is not simple, it's not mere common sense
Morality describes an environment, not isolated behavior, in order for one to be moral, they must be in an environment that fosters it.

That being said, we should strive to make an environment to be as easily moral as possible, it wouldn't make sense to promote morality if going into said environment, you would be treated immorally by being punched in the face
A moral environment is a goal to pursue and sustain as a pre-requisite to most good things in life. For example, we cannot have a good cookout without being moral towards each other.

By spanking in this day and age you are claiming to have understood how the human body and brain works and claim it is the most effective tool for correcting behavior.
The common sense justification is nothing more than the logic of the following claim: "every person that drinks water has died in 100 years or less, therefore water is toxic" -> that is what common sense would have us believe over 1000 years ago according to some tribes.
Consider communication thru body language instead. Consider multiple modes of communication. Our bodies are constantly communicating with our environment. Make sure you only give those you trust actual control.

This is called nonverbal communication.
Symbolism

Spanking affects intellectual development, those who deny it can see the example detailing how going to the gym can boost academic performance even though they are not directly related to each other - it is how our body reacts.

This is proof that all actions, including spanking, affects more than one thing that what we realize on a surface level common sense level of understanding

Spanking encourages impulsive behavior

Yes, most pro-social behavior is impulsive

Spanking causes intrusive thoughts, yes thinking is an action, therefore a skill that can be mastered, it's called intellectualism

TO THOSE THAT ARE PRO-SPANKING: You'd be lying if you said you didn't have any intrusive thoughts, this is caused by the spanking, yes, they are related even if you don't think they are. Similarly to how certain colors can attract head and not just used for cosmetics.

Spanking teaches the child that there is no practical reason behind morality.
Spanking is not in accordance with how the human body or brain works

To those who said it taught them right from wrong, ask them to explain why what is wrong is wrong, if they answer with dogma, then they clearly don't understand why.

The need to spank is almost always the parents fault (assuming child does not have maldeveloped brain) because it is the parents responsibility to ensure the prevention of crime.

no different than getting mad at child for being a school shooter after being a school shooter.

Similar to how cigarettes used to be seen as a positive thing in the 60's same thing can be said about spanking nowadays, we know it hinders cognitive development.
Newer understandings of how the brain works render spanking ineffective in the longer-run even if we don't live forever, our children will carry legacy

Spanking can cause an lesser grey matter in brain, literally leading to anti-intellectualism

Spanking does not take into account non-verbal communication, or rather communication with one's own enviornment.

This can lead to communication problems

Children that act out are the real victims as they are the one's that have not been provided a place to practice their intellectual curiosity

Similar to how those who commit heinous crimes (those on death row or life in prison) are also a victim as chances are they had a bad childhood. They are not just the perpetrators, but also the victim.
Same thing can be said for small times crimes like petty theft or acting out in public. Applying the same logic, we can see that it is the parent that put the kid in a tempting enviornment without any viable training beforehand.

Encouraging not stealing can be taught by explaining concepts such as: Personal Space, Bodily Autonomy, Social Boundaries, Trust, Control, Giving Up Control, Vulnerability,
People steal because of temptation and curiosity, temptation is the cause of this.

When this curiosity is not fostered beforehand, it will leach onto society in the form of stealing, etc.

Self-control is the enemy of curiosity

This bring out the point that one must be in an enviornment that fosters curiosity with moral boundaries. But reasonable boundaries so that they don't require excess or unbearable amounts of self-control.

Without verbal explanation, children have no idea how to tactfully regulate and decide who to trust. Rather they find themselves in tempting situations and just practice self-control to get out, they commonly blame themselves without recognizing the external, rather uncontrollable, factor
Use "rehabilitative" punishment as opposed to retributive punishment

Retribution does nothing in terms of understanding why, it only creates a dogmatic idea in the head that does not reason with it's practical effects. Sooner or later, without understanding why, one is unable to identify their limits of being in an abusive situation.
Retribution does not actually teach someone anything academic or of value.

Don't spank your kids for stealing instead explain to them why things like large amounts of money are locked up without the publics' view and whereas things like kids toys are not and how they need to develop self-control if they want to live in a civilized society in the presence of other people.
Explain the history of why your kid is ending up where he is now, talk about human struggles
The logic of thinking like a spanker does not involve logic at all in terms of how human beings work

To explain, to communicate with other human beings, one must teach by ensuring the enviornment is safe to learn in. This is what a school does with academic topics. The same logic can be used to teach self-control and resistance. There are levels to understanding one's enviornment.
Teach a child how to mentally get into the mindset of being in public and respecting property by teaching them to trust their surroundings under given conditions.

If you can't explain it to them in words, then they are too young to be explaining that to in terms of adjectives like self-control and need other stimulation to keep their curiosity until they can be explained that to. Academic schoolteachers use the same concept. You wouldn't teach calculus to a 9 year old, but you would to a 19 year old because of their pre-requisite experience, same logic here.
Unless your child is mentally deformed and in a way that their genetic makeup makes them a psychopath, there is no reason to use force as such.
If you can't explain their behavior, then you don't understand how to communicate, how to understand human behavior and how to prevent bad behaviors by modifying surroundings.
It's similar to arguing with a scientist on the effects of toothpaste, just because you uses SLS in your mouth and turned out fine does not make it the most optimal given our new understanding of human behavior.

For example, if a study came out stating that the more children were exposed to red light, the more their amygdala lightened so therefore they removed all red colored objects in a testing room to dole out distractions.

Explain how there are right are wrong are derived
Explain how there are boundaries to everything, including personal space

For example, it's ok if someone is in your presence - because the presence of surroundings withing your senses does not make it your "personal space" - or does it? Either way, explain in what conditions it is okay to react as such. For example, it is not okay to react by kicking a car that is parked, however, if a car that is in yourself is coming at you, it is okay to kick it.

instead of hitting to explain, try using words to explain to children not to steal given it's practical purpose in society, if you can't use words, you are being dogmatic and don't even understand why yourself. Which is just as bad as someone doing something without knowing why they're doing it.
Children aren't mentally resilient enough to gain the skills of understanding that the purpose of being around people isn't always to interact with them. This requires a lot of pre-requisite work and social conditioning.
Take the time to understand the reasoning behind the behavior
Spanking logic does not make sense because it can be used to justify flawless behavior. It is reactive not preventative. You wouldn't spank a child before they commit a crime, however crime-committing does not make sense as we just use people to place the blame onto showing a need to place a blame onto someone, proving that there is too many people in this world to live a quality lifestyle.
actually explain to yourself what you're trying to teach. If you are saying: stealing is wrong, you are not considering the mental effects of being in the presence of something new and shiny and intriguing from a child's mind, instead, what should happen is consider the conditions of the enviornment and explain to them concepts of self-control, patience, trust, expectations of said enviornment and have them understand why they should derive the goal of not stealing, because, even a criminal knows it's wrong to steal, hence why they don't do it in broad daylight, but that does not stop them, instead logically deriving the goal of why they are in that enviornment what their purpose in said enviornment is and actually comprehending it will be far more effective in preventing promiscuous thoughts - Yes, even thoughts can be immoral.

Not to mention, how do we know that it's not wrong to be in someone's presence, it does not make sense to be in a tempting enviornment and expect someone to practice self-control. For example, if you are on a diet, you wouldn't voluntarily walk into a McDonalds - it does not make sense.

If you can't explain what you're teaching via words, then you simply don't understand it yourself and probably shouldn't be a parent.
the way you teach one thing is the way you teach everything else, explain to the child how to identify which variables are conditional and which bounds they should be limited to, for example, when i was having trouble sleeping: i identified variables like screen time, eating time, etc. that helped identify my flaws

If you tend to teach the child via spanking, you aren't actually identifying the root cause and putting into words

Spanking does not teach children to cooperate
Spanking does not typically take into consideration the mental effects it can have on a kid - spanking can affect areas in life such as academics and cause brain fog
Spanking can also leave people vulnerable to not understanding their enviornment.
Spanking does not address the development of malicious feelings

Within the user interface of life, parents must understand the multitude of influences within a child's life, such as a tobacco store near a school is a big no-no.

A child might be "overstimulated" when in public and just simply does not comprehend how to navigate thru the public sphere yet - in that case, it does not make sense to expose them to that kind of enviornment
Everything you do is an opinion - a mood - by spanking them you are teaching that certain development of thoughts are unacceptable to think up of making them unacceptable opinions
The logic of explaining to someone that stealing/smoking is "wrong" simply does not make sense unless you give the why behind it, and if the person cannot comprehend the why part, then they are too young to be exposed to that kind of stuff anyways. Similarly to how children's shouldn't be viewing adult content.
affect multiple areas of life
Spanking does not just affect one area of life, it affects all areas of life such as logical setting boundaries and affect academic performance
What you learn outside of school matters more
Don't evaluate children's behavior as right or wrong as it takes more to comprehend behind rather than be judgmental than understanding and targeting the real cause of the issue. It's likely that your child was overstimulated from the public enviornment and needed someplace else to be, since the goal is to stimulate the intellectual curiosity of the child.

Also, identifying something as right or wrong simply does not make sense as it cannot answer the question: what are you comparing right or wrong to - what is the scale used to measure if something is right or wrong? The answers is almost always: feelings or mutual feelings. The tricky part is that children have yet to learn how to balance the desires of others with their own needs and the specifics matter, especially to children. You must tactfully desensitize them.

Spanking is as ridiculous as teaching a child to learn mathematics by hitting them every time they don't comprehend something. As teachers, you know that if they don't understand something it means a previous concept - something of lesser complexity - simply wasn't understood.
Those who say explain then spank simply don't understand human behavior at all - if you can explain it to them to the point where they can understand via verbatim, then you wouldn't have to use physical reprehension, if you can't then they're too young to be in that situation to begin with and should start with something less intimidating.
Teach them concepts such as human cooperation
To change someone's perspective for the longer-term and actually understand, you must be convincing intellectually, not just physically demanding.
If you can't explain how to think or derive said conclusion in a way they can understand it, then they are simply too young to be in that situation. Similar to how you wouldn't assign responsibility to a kid for entering a hard hat only zone simply because they are too young to understand/comprehend the dangers of why they need to be wearing a hard hat, so, simply best to avoid that situation altogether in lieu of one that is more easily able to understand by the child like going to the library.
Spanking does not take into the cause of the desire to "steal" or "smoke" more often than not, children are exposed to these things and develop a sense of curiosity to these things rather than a sense of malicious desire. In reality, to change the perspective of children towards these things, we must limit exposure to this kind of enviornment that promotes such bad thoughts and wait till they are old enough to comprehend concepts such as human cooperation via verbatim.
"Don't me telling a person how to interpret their surroundings and how to learn from their experiences"

For example: if a person got raped, don't be like "they should now interpret it and take it as now that i got raped i will were less slutty clothing" -- When in reality the moral responsibility isn't on them, Thus furthers my point that the experiences controls our thoughts, this also furthers my point that middle classes folks who live amongst the masses in close-quarters houses are abusive by nature as being exposed to others as soon as you walk outside is rather stressful, proving that you shouldn't have been born and are one of the masses, moreover, proving quality over quantity, implying you need to be humbled by grappling.

The same logic used for spanking children can be the same logic used to justify extreme measures as a punishment for petty theft like chopping the hands off of a thief for steaking a candy bar.

we both recognize that thief is likely to not steal again, however, it does not service much practical value as the person who stole can and should change with proper conditioning.

In the same way sleeping is a part of training and recovery, the same thing spanking should be considered as - spanking can affect academic train of thought.

Such as how losing a couple of hours of sleep will not only affect the morning but the rest of the day. Imagine if you had to take a test that morning, that lack of sleep would be affecting it.
In other words, the logic of learning from spankings slows down intellectual development

Knowing when to limit curiosity is a good thing, however, if one cannot explain it via verbatim the situation is too dangerous and requires too much trust.
To those who claim indoctrination, ask them to define indoctrination - you'll soon realize, they think in terms of their ideas vs. mine, instead of reasoning vs. reasoning. They'd rather argue rather than care to understand reasoning.
affects more than what you're trying to "teach"

if you can't put it into words and teach what kind of thought process they should have, they're too young to learn said contents

does not teach to avoid certain experiences that trigger these desires, instead just suppresses curiosity instead of being occupied with another form of curiosity. Children are curious and that should be encouraged in the proper enviornment.

does not teach children to encourage curiosity

does not teach them what the purpose in life is to follow curiosity and to be intellectually developed instead of dogmatically moral. Every goal you set comes from what you think the purpose in life is.
Feelings do matter, we are controlled what to think by enviornment, once you realize this, you'll see how pointless life really is - deciding what to experience
Children should be treated as intellectuals
parents never have "bad" intentions when spanking children

First, define "bad"

using loaded adjectives to describe a goal doesn't make much sense if you don't describe the goal first. The goal should be achieved based on how human beings work.

Next, intentions don't matter as much as the effect of your actions. For example, if you push someone off of a cliff, regardless of your intentions - maybe you were trying to get them from falling off of the cliff - at the end of the day you pushed them off of the cliff (and they died) therefore, you pushed them, period.
just be blatant with yourself - you are trying to coerce, convince your child to see things a certain way. If you can't explain it via verbatim and they comprehend then you're reasoning isn't up to par.
Don't confuse intentions with actions

effect the brain in much more ways than just one
I can use the same logic to justify immoral acts because hitting someone enables me to take control of their amygdala which shuts down the logical part of the brain processing.
can also prevent stealing by occupying with someone else to do. can't steal if you're focus on something completely different, this proves that it takes mental energy to identify something

Can't steal something you don't know about. Like I said before, everything is conditional. Likewise, how you wouldn't expose a child to a hard-hat only area if your goal is safety, it would be to rather avoid this experience.

Similar to how common sense is used to avoid bad situations, like avoiding stepping into a pool of lava because you know from experience that excessive heat isn't suitable for survival sustaining conditions.

feeling formula

To generate curiosity in surroundings, one must be exposed to it first

The only people who agree with spanking children as a form of discipline are those who don't care to question why a child does certain things to begin with and what a child's goal's are - their goals are curiosity and it should be encouraged for intellectual development goals, goals such as respect should be instilled later on or in accordance with intellectual development, such as understanding of how to focus on goals, isolate distractions, decide what goals to pursue, see obstacles, etc.

The only people that don't agree with goals of developing goals of intellectual curiosity are those who have been conditioned to think that children should pursue these goals, the default value is to be curious, not to be dogmatic

Those who agree with spanking don't recognize that one must learn from their past experiences, if you reflect on your pasts experiences without considering the reasoning fort your past actions, you won't be able identify the cause of the problem - first without understanding how human beings work.

Only those who won't recognize that children are scientists and are left with unconditioned curiosity will be able to appreciate and pursue the goal of intellectual development.

Spanking does not directly teach one what to think in a situation to calm down - it literally does not make any sense. To an intellectual, this is how an intellectual would view it.
Spanking does not address the mental variables in place, such as self-control, perception, evaulation, application of criteria, conclusion,

Why?

I've always had this intuition in my head since I was a kid that the mere idea of hitting someone and violence in general naturally hurt my head.

I also know that this is not how scientists raise their children

Necessary evil: use as mental tools not curiosity

children are born scientists, and I feel like there is an optimal way to balance social boundaries and curiosity

understand your own behavior to understand others' behavior

In good parenting, spanking is something that has never crossed mind

Sources

https://reddit.com/u/anonymousebe_new
https://reddit.com/u/anonymousebe_SFW
https://reddit.com/u/ConservativeMother

look for the post on r/parenting subreddit on how to teach child on stealing is wrong without spanking.

Personal Application: [Personal Mini Blog Post]

This is why I was unable to set healthy boundaries in forming effective friendships growing up. It is because my subconscious mind was confused about boundaries in the social realm.

What spanking really teaches the subconscious mind:

Learned helplessness
Stunted creativity
Tolerating stupidity
Unable to socially navigate or speak your unfiltered mind
unspoken communication

What spanking really teaches | Part 2:

Here, I will detail formally, what spanking actually teaches a child.

Teaching how to think and the reasoning behind spanking.

How should a kid view a spanking?

This is what you are meaning to communicate to the child. You must make the child think accordingly:

"If I continue to do these things, I will feel embarrassment and pain, so I should stop doing it."

There are many things wrong with this thought process:

It does not directly convey discussing the limits of one's self-control, personal space, empathy.

Yes, self-control is needed in today's society with exposure to lots of stimuli, however, there are ways to go about helping a child comprehend and understand why they must behave a certain way.
Weather you know it or not, there are limits to everyone's self-control. Self-control isn't unlimited.

It does not directly convey the reason why we are moral.

Having knowledge of why one is being moral will make one become moral for longer.

It does not directly convey the symbolism behind why we value certain creatures called human beings
Similarly to how we expect addicted people to not have self-control when in the presence of drugs, similar can be said about children, instead of exposing them to much stimuli without supervision, how about you gradually expose them to a newer enviornment.

This is the same reason why a church service isn't held in a bar or strip club or any other tempting enviornment.

Yes, I am blaming the enviornment, and yes, it is justified.

It's no different than blaming a victim of torture for being immoral and drinking alcohol after being released from torture. You are not understanding the reason behind the motives. It does not make sense to isolate one singular event when your life is not at risk.

Assumes that all children are the same and will react the same way to a spanking

I understand that everyone is different and require different parenting methods, however, not all children will be able to think: pain = bad. Also, if hitting someone to make them symbolize an idea as bad is what makes it bad, then that is simply not true.

What to do instead:

Reason with the child - speak their language
Human beings learn most when understanding the reason why behind something, if it cannot be communicated verbally, then it isn't to be communicated at all. Simply put, if you can't put it into words, it can't be rationale.
Teach your child to be aware of the the intracies of the multitasking of the brain
Teach your child to be aware of their moral limits of self-control, personal space, etc.
stimuli in a micro level
Teach your child to avoid morally compromising situations by understanding what situations, circumstances and conditions to avoid being in to cause a need for more self-control.
Teach your child how to identify people, respect their presence when conditions are appropriate
Teach your child how to handle distractions (when respecting the presence of immoral people)
Take your child to a museum or library to have them engage with their intellectual curiosity.
If you can't explain it to them via verbatim, then they shouldn't be in said enviornment to begin with and should start with something simpler so they actually understand why.

Tips on formulating more arguments:

every action u take says what u think purpose in life is

Keywords:

Social lens, how the brain works, moral environment, sociology, psychology, conditioning, human behavior conditioning, behavior, natures' behavior, environmental behavior, we are our environment, we are a part of environment, thoughts affect feelings, observe your thoughts, unbiased feelings, necessary evil, dogma, understanding motivation, abusive situation, practical value, potentiality, limits on potentiality, reward system, biological motivation, changing biology, science of temptation, feelings formula, mental proactiveness, emotional regulation, limits on temptation, free will is not real, social feelings, social realm, social influence, unregulated variables, trust, forced trust, who to be compassionate to and who not to, mental effects, how to teach a child self control, desires limits, tempting presence, seeing too much information, overstimulation, too many people in this world, solution to overpopulation, how to set goals, comprehension process, learning process, learning how to learn, learning logic of getting slapped, science of confusion,

Search This Blog

Ebenezers' Freethinking Notes

Timely argument against spanking justifications