The best method

what i am trying to say is that using physical force such as punching, kicking, slapping, or using a wooden stick isn't the right way to teach someone something. becuse it will break all the friendship bounds. and it may make him\her hate everyone and and hate himself\herself which may lead to self injuring, that person killing himself\herself, or live and become a bully. if a child made a mistake we shouldn't use physical force to tell him that what he\she did is wrong. no we should use some other punishment as Hera Ledro mantioned. the ONLY time a person should use physical force is when you protect someone or something important to you. not whenyou hear that someone is going to hurt your friends or family. you only use it when you see it start. and there is a diffrent between using physical force to teach and using physical force to defened.
 
according to the Department of Education statistics. 223,190 students received corporal punishment in 2006-07. That number is down from 342,038 students in 2000-01.

in five years and several months corporal punishment showed some effect on 118.848. or maybe less than that considering that some of them died or in hospital.

if corporal punishment really changes how people behave then they sould hit the child when he is two or three years old and it is done. he will be the perfect human. but no that is not true.

using physical force is effective for a short periode. but after a while that person will get used to pain. let us say that a school used corporal punishment to punch it's students. and after a few years they banned it.
lets us say that one of the students behaved in a bad way and sent to the princaple. that student will say will laugh and make some bad comments. such as my two years sister can do much better than that. how would you act then if you were the teacher.
 
you cannot define everything with logic. sometimes illogical thoughts makes us understand the truth more than the logical thoughts. you want real examples. i will give you some: Steeling, Murder, Rape. these are some of the things you read and hear in the news. and you also hear and read that those criminals get punched. if you see the reason why most of them commeted these crimes. you will see that there parents always punch them by using physical force. here is a Sociological Theory behinde crimes and violance
"Studies have also found the negative or noxious stimuli can cause crime. For example studies have found a range of negative events and conditions can increase the likelihood of crime such as child abuse, criminal victimization, physical punishment by parents, negative relations with parents, negative relations with teachers, negative school experiences, negative experiences with peers, neighborhood problems and other life events which are negative can cause strain on individuals and it increases the likelihood of that individual to commit crime in these conditions. "
 
i never said that all criminals were punched by using physical force. i said that most of them have been punched. so don't say that i said something when i didn't say it. you know what Decado you and me are the same. both of us said some Theories and non showed any evidence to prove there point.
 
Yeah, difference is, i didn't make a thread about my theory, and claim the other theory was 100% invalid.

You're the one claiming that non force is ALWAYS the best method, and you're the one making a thread about it. Thus, the onus is on you. Make sense?

is this enough to prove my point? i have made you agree that both of us cannot prove there point. we have been arguing and trying to force the other side to agree with us. but none have agreed. we kept arguing.
 
I WANT TO KNOW WHERE YOU GOT YOUR INFORMATION ABOUT PUNCHING FROM

You keep saying things like "You will see their parents always punch them" This means you must have already seen it. WHERE!? PLEASE SHOW ME!

Hope that clears up the misconception.


i got that from my own experience. you see when i was three i used to steel candy from my mother's room. and after a few hours my father comes and hit me becuse i stool a candy. the next day the same thing happens. this happened for two years. when i became 12 years old. i used to steel my classmates pens. i see someone carrying a pen that he got from his father as a present for getting a high grade. he leaves it in class. at lunch hour i go and steel it from his desk. and i got physically punched at school and at home for doing that. i even did something that people haven't thought that i will do. i burned books and note books that belongs to two of my classmates and got in a fight with one of them. and i got punched for that. i stopped from soing these stuff when i became 18 years old it is becuse of one person he didn't hit me. no he told me something that made me think about it for a whole year. he told me:

"if you want to be a shadow. One that no light will shine on. then go and do it. but of you want to become the moon that shine for others then move back one step"

you may say that i have made up this story. i only got five words for you.
that is up to you.
 
Last edited:
is there any invisible posts in this thread or are you making things up. becuse i never said that what happened to me happened to everyone. i said that most of the people have been physically punched.
 
" To make someone yield without a fight is the best thing! Because we are humans! Battles involve contriving! It means to draw him\her in as an ally without hurting or tormenting him\her."

That's the more honerable way to go about it.

But smart fighters aren't trying to win over or beat the individual that they're fighting, he's trying to win over the entire crowd watching.
 
Point One: It doesn't matter if you are saying everyone, or most people, you STILL need to prove it. What i said STILL applies. You can't apply your experiences to MOST people either without proof.

i disagree becuse it does matter to you here is what you said

November 20, 2008, 8:47 PM
You can't base an arguments off of "oh this happened to me, so thats what happens to EVERYONE, so my theory must be correct."

what happened to me didn't happen to most of the people well not exactly. but it is one of the examples. becuse the others may experienced something worse than what i have experienced. and some of them didn't. but they suffered from physical punchment.


" To make someone yield without a fight is the best thing! Because we are humans! Battles involve contriving! It means to draw him\her in as an ally without hurting or tormenting him\her."

That's the more honerable way to go about it.

But smart fighters aren't trying to win over or beat the individual that they're fighting, he's trying to win over the entire crowd watching.

and what better way to do that than making them believe that you are a person. who don't throw other people's live for his own. but use his brain and heart to win.
 
Last edited:
Firstly, please respond to BOTH of my points - I showed you clearly DID say everyone.

Secondly - You still cannot just ASSUME it happens to most people. you have to PROVE it. Just because you say it doesn't make it true... Is this making sense to you at all?

yes you are right i didn't responed for the second point for one reason

you take part of what i say and use it to prove me wrong. that is why i didn't reply to it becuse it won't change a thing.

and one other thing. i never assume that something happened or will happen. becuse i have seen it. and i am sure that you have heard and red about it too. that most of the people who have been physically punched uses violence as a way to end things.
 
We only encourage members to back-up their claims with sources; it's not considered a compulsory requirement. Despite The Sleeping Forest being for serious discussions, it's in a forum that is otherwise relaxed, so it's not really the end of the world if someone doesn't provide sources.

You can still request for sources to be provided but all I ask is that every topic doesn't turn in to a desperate scramble to show debate fallacies or, further, stray from the entire purpose of the thread entirely. A number of the active threads, at the moment, are more focused on the technicalities of a fallacy as opposed to the actual thread topic, so try to bare in mind what I've asked, guys.

Thanks in advance, guys.
 
While this may be true, and some points may be weaker than others in this thread, reducing the direction of the thread to fallacies usually ends up in the deletion of those posts, because they tend to be deemed as spam/off-topic. I'm not singling anyone out - I'm reminding everyone to stay on-topic.

With that said, I ask anyone with a further question on this matter to PM me. Thanks.
 
Back
Top