Punishment only teaches kids to lie

[Lunatic]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/art-markm ... ostpopular

I don't post much but I do love to read the discussions! I thought this article in the Huffingtonpost was very relevant to the Pearl's teachings. Basically a study was done in two separate schools, one punished children physically and verbally, the other used only mild punishments. The children in the punishment school learned to lie more often and better than the children who were not physically punished. The poor kids had learn to lie to protect themselves from punishment.

Also on a related note, I heard on NPR last night about a study that described how if children were allowed to disagree and argue with their parents (constructively), they were more able to withstand peer pressure for drinking and drugs. Teens who were not allowed to argue with their parents were very susceptible to peer pressure. I guess my kids will be fine since they argue with me all the time!

[Brainsample]

Both John Bradshaw and Alice Miller point this out as well. You train kids to avoid punishment, not engage in healthy and moral behavior. They might do what you want, but they do it for the wrong reasons. Bradshaw calls this the culture of obedience, and it is far better to create a culture of virtue for your kids. Otherwise, you train them that "might makes right," and they will always respond with knee jerk reactions to power, because the parent conditioned them to respond to force, not to be a responsible moral agent. You make kids ripe for the picking by sociopaths and dictators.

[Doomed Harlottt]

Amen.

It is amazing to me that this isn't common sense to everyone. In an adult context, the morally degrading aspect of torture is well-known. In 1984, Winston learns under torture that he would be willing to sell out the love of his life in order to get the torture to stop. I once read an account by a Holocaust victim that one of her worst moments was fighting with a starving child to take away a crust of her bread for herself.

The only thing you learn from physical torment, deprivation, or humiliation is that you want to avoid it at all costs. Staying out of trouble - whether by becoming completely compliant, lying, selling out your friends or a combination thereof -- becomes the overriding concern, not doing the right thing. Wouldn't we have our children learn to love doing the right thing for its own sake? That virtue is its own reward and vice its own hell?

[Brainsample]

Amen.

It is amazing to me that this isn't common sense to everyone. In an adult context, the morally degrading aspect of torture is well-known. In 1984, Winston learns under torture that he would be willing to sell out the love of his life in order to get the torture to stop. I once read an account by a Holocaust victim that one of her worst moments was fighting with a starving child to take away a crust of her bread for herself.

The only thing you learn from physical torment, deprivation, or humiliation is that you want to avoid it at all costs. Staying out of trouble - whether by becoming completely compliant, lying, selling out your friends or a combination thereof -- becomes the overriding concern, not doing the right thing. Wouldn't we have our children learn to love doing the right thing for its own sake? That virtue is its own reward and vice its own hell?

The flip side of this is true in these "follow the list" kinds of Christianity, too. I love this analogy that I heard from an American Jewish convert to Christianity who eventually moved to Israel.

Think of how kids love to crawl up on the lap of a favored adult, just to cuddle and because they find that person fascinating and wonderful. They just do it because they love the person, and there's nothing in the world that they'd rather be doing than snuggling. This is something that I think God would like of his followers, even inviting his beloved to call Him "Daddy."

Now, think of the kid who crawls up on the lap of an adult because they know that the adult always has a piece of candy to give them. They could take or leave the person, but they know that if they go through the motions and perform the behavior, they'll get the candy. All they want is the candy, and the person with the candy is merely the means to an end. It's about the candy, not about the joy of loving another person.

I think that more oft' than not, the whole "fundie" thing has far more to do with soliciting the candy than anything else. Their religion has more to do with behaviours that solicit desired responses and gain than it does a culture of virtue or the spirit behind it. Why would they take any kind of a different approach to discipline then, if it's all so pragmatic?

I'm not in it for the candy.