neillywwheeley Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 You seem to be labouring this idea a bit too much. I think you just trying to be cussed for the sake of it? You don't need proof that animals do not have morals. All except a small number of 'higher functioning' animals act on instinct. Humans do not. hmm at the risk of also sounded cussed haha! humans, regardless of their actions, i think act upon fear or love...even someone mental does the things they do as a reaction to fear or love or for survival (no matter how distorted that appears) it surely can be regarded as instinct? everyone is trying to survive on the world as they see it- using their instincts. it's probably easier to say that we all use our instincts but some of us are shit at having instincts haha.. and what is higher functioning? the most successful organism on the planet is probably some algae somewhere or the ant....intelligence as we judge it does not make a high functioning animal...i give you the human race...haha we can recite the classics and spell Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis but we shit on our own doorstep and think it's clever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 You seem to be labouring this idea a bit too much. I think you just trying to be cussed for the sake of it? You don't need proof that animals do not have morals. All except a small number of 'higher functioning' animals act on instinct. Humans do not. hmm at the risk of also sounded cussed haha! humans, regardless of their actions, i think act upon fear or love...even someone mental does the things they do as a reaction to fear or love or for survival (no matter how distorted that appears) it surely can be regarded as instinct? everyone is trying to survive on the world as they see it- using their instincts. it's probably easier to say that we all use our instincts but some of us are shit at having instincts haha.. and what is higher functioning? the most successful organism on the planet is probably some algae somewhere or the ant....intelligence as we judge it does not make a high functioning animal...i give you the human race...haha we can recite the classics and spell Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis but we shit on our own doorstep and think it's clever This could be interesting! Might have to pull up a chair for this one (Neil, you might want to read past threads about LDV and understand his point of view as this may help you to see things from his perspective which doesn't always correspond to others points of view, but if we were all the same, then it wouldn't be half as fun) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananaman Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis Yayyyy copy and paste. Google: long word = Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neillywwheeley Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 opinions are like assholes on this subject, they have been for years. As a parent myself I do not hit my children, however...I cannot be sure of what my reaction would be if my 4 year old child attacked someone. If you have an already violent child I dont think that striking out in violence is the right answer!!! Fortunately I have never had to deal with an issue like this, but violence does not cure violence especially in little children. If a parent strikes a child out of anger chances are the child will take that as an acceptable behaviour. This story only leaves me with one question...what is the childs home life like??? yeah complicated debate personally i think we have to look at the objective of using smacking etc to repremand kids...basically it is to introduce cause and effect into a childs brain...dont do this or something bad will happen. it's basic conditioning. applying pain is a way of instantly getting a message across that lets the person know not to do something or else...effective in children because you dont have to always explain the actual facts. you can convey ideas beyond their knowledge base...now for the important bit...we know this has worked in the past, but we really didn't stop to wonder why...now as we analyse this process we know we can use better systems to introduce this idea. like super nanny's naughty zone or recent schools in the uk introducing the playstation ban programs....these replacement smacks are a tad long winded and some people believe a good ol' smack never did them any harm, but the reality is it has done some people a lot of harm and more controlled punishment systems are needed..especially that involve both the school and the parents working together. i was smacked a bit when i was a kid- but the difference was i spent a lot of time being cared for, not given stuff or entertained- but actually being cared for- so i knew when i got a smack it was for my own good. if i did a bad thing i learnt...i got a smack and a talking to- things were always explained. thing is i was never that naughty. as generations of kids are changing through time- i think they are so over stimulated now that they get hyper boredom...this combined with food that is just not suitable for them leads to acting out and short attention spans. being wrapped in cotton wool doesn't exactly induce a striving attitude- it can breed nonchalance and nihilism! we do it to ourselves! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananaman Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 yeah complicated debatepersonally i think we have to look at the objective of using smacking etc to repremand kids...basically it is to introduce cause and effect into a childs brain...dont do this or something bad will happen. it's basic conditioning. applying pain is a way of instantly getting a message across that lets the person know not to do something or else...effective in children because you dont have to always explain the actual facts. you can convey ideas beyond their knowledge base...now for the important bit...we know this has worked in the past, but we really didn't stop to wonder why...now as we analyse this process we know we can use better systems to introduce this idea. like super nanny's naughty zone or recent schools in the uk introducing the playstation ban programs....these replacement smacks are a tad long winded and some people believe a good ol' smack never did them any harm, but the reality is it has done some people a lot of harm and more controlled punishment systems are needed..especially that involve both the school and the parents working together. i was smacked a bit when i was a kid- but the difference was i spent a lot of time being cared for, not given stuff or entertained- but actually being cared for- so i knew when i got a smack it was for my own good. if i did a bad thing i learnt...i got a smack and a talking to- things were always explained. thing is i was never that naughty. as generations of kids are changing through time- i think they are so over stimulated now that they get hyper boredom...this combined with food that is just not suitable for them leads to acting out and short attention spans. being wrapped in cotton wool doesn't exactly induce a striving attitude- it can breed nonchalance and nihilism! we do it to ourselves! Your children are buggered then. Didn't anyone slap some basic syntax in to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neillywwheeley Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis Yayyyy copy and paste. Google: long word = Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis yeah thanks good input.....but i actually googled the "longest word in the dictionary" coz i read some books once and knew Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis was it.. i forgot how to spell it...i used to know back at uni when i spent a day learning how to spell it instead of doing some real learning. so there! remember people dont always have to be as stupid as ones self Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neillywwheeley Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 yeah complicated debatepersonally i think we have to look at the objective of using smacking etc to repremand kids...basically it is to introduce cause and effect into a childs brain...dont do this or something bad will happen. it's basic conditioning. applying pain is a way of instantly getting a message across that lets the person know not to do something or else...effective in children because you dont have to always explain the actual facts. you can convey ideas beyond their knowledge base...now for the important bit...we know this has worked in the past, but we really didn't stop to wonder why...now as we analyse this process we know we can use better systems to introduce this idea. like super nanny's naughty zone or recent schools in the uk introducing the playstation ban programs....these replacement smacks are a tad long winded and some people believe a good ol' smack never did them any harm, but the reality is it has done some people a lot of harm and more controlled punishment systems are needed..especially that involve both the school and the parents working together. i was smacked a bit when i was a kid- but the difference was i spent a lot of time being cared for, not given stuff or entertained- but actually being cared for- so i knew when i got a smack it was for my own good. if i did a bad thing i learnt...i got a smack and a talking to- things were always explained. thing is i was never that naughty. as generations of kids are changing through time- i think they are so over stimulated now that they get hyper boredom...this combined with food that is just not suitable for them leads to acting out and short attention spans. being wrapped in cotton wool doesn't exactly induce a striving attitude- it can breed nonchalance and nihilism! we do it to ourselves! Your children are buggered then. Didn't anyone slap some basic syntax in to you? yeah sure but i like to make you work for your money...i've never known people to get so irate about sentences structure. go and read some royal memoirs if you want fine english sentences. this is a forum on the internet, i'm sure you can work out the odd missed comma and so on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananaman Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 yeah thanks good input.....but i actually googled the "longest word in the dictionary" coz i read some books once and knew Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis was it.. i forgot how to spell it...i used to know back at uni when i spent a day learning how to spell it instead of doing some real learning. so there! remember people dont always have to be as stupid as ones self What on earth were you doing spending a whole day at a(n) University? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neillywwheeley Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 yeah thanks good input.....but i actually googled the "longest word in the dictionary" coz i read some books once and knew Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis was it.. i forgot how to spell it...i used to know back at uni when i spent a day learning how to spell it instead of doing some real learning. so there! remember people dont always have to be as stupid as ones self What on earth were you doing spending a whole day at University? i was visiting your girlfriend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananaman Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 yeah sure but i like to make you work for your money...i've never known people to get so irate about sentences structure. go and read some royal memoirs if you want fine english sentences. this is a forum on the internet, i'm sure you can work out the odd missed comma and so on I'm retired, but I was having a far more base pop at your command of the keyboard. Sentence structure hasn't got a look in yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neillywwheeley Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 yeah sure but i like to make you work for your money...i've never known people to get so irate about sentences structure. go and read some royal memoirs if you want fine english sentences. this is a forum on the internet, i'm sure you can work out the odd missed comma and so on I'm retired, but I was having a far more base pop at your command of the keyboard. Sentence structure hasn't got a look in yet. well you have fun with that...whilst you're working it all out perhaps you'll remember what the real debate was about...and possibly add something worthy of responce...meanwhile if you lose any more sleep the number of mr hewson, my old english teacher, is probably in the book. he's retired too. you'll probably get along great. horlicks. dictionary dates...the world is your oyster... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 You seem to be labouring this idea a bit too much. I think you just trying to be cussed for the sake of it? You don't need proof that animals do not have morals. All except a small number of 'higher functioning' animals act on instinct. Humans do not. hmm at the risk of also sounded cussed haha! humans, regardless of their actions, i think act upon fear or love...even someone mental does the things they do as a reaction to fear or love or for survival (no matter how distorted that appears) it surely can be regarded as instinct? everyone is trying to survive on the world as they see it- using their instincts. it's probably easier to say that we all use our instincts but some of us are shit at having instincts haha.. and what is higher functioning? the most successful organism on the planet is probably some algae somewhere or the ant....intelligence as we judge it does not make a high functioning animal...i give you the human race...haha we can recite the classics and spell Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis but we shit on our own doorstep and think it's clever You think that humans act upon their emotions alone, with no rational thinking behind their actions? I don't agree. Some behaviours are a result of pure instinct. But our social interactions are highly complex and even where instinct plays a part, we have complex value system and understandings that function to adapt our responses. I am not talking about the ability to survive, not how civilised we are. I am talking about our intelligence and awareness of ourselves in the world. personally i think we have to look at the objective of using smacking etc to repremand kids...basically it is to introduce cause and effect into a childs brain...dont do this or something bad will happen. it's basic conditioning. applying pain is a way of instantly getting a message across that lets the person know not to do something or else...effective in children because you dont have to always explain the actual facts.Yes, it is basic conditioning. But I completely disagree with your ASSUMPTION that the facts should not be explained. Parents should HAVE to justify their control and power over the child if the parents wishes to assert it. But the issue we should look at is not the objective at all. It is the validity of the absolute authority that a parent has over their child and result of this unquestioned belief in its justification. It is also about the utter hypocrisy of using force on another human being to punish and then living in a society which sees the use of force as being criminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.