View Poll Results: What is the best example of fair punishment for a week?

Voters
25. You may not vote on this poll
  • Timmy has 2 toys, Tommy has 4 toys. Both boys loose all toys.

    21 84.00%
  • Timmy has 2 toys, Tommy has 4 toys. Both boys loose 1 toy.

    2 8.00%
  • Timmy has 2 toys, Tommy has 4 toys. Both boys loose 2 toys.

    1 4.00%
  • Timmy has 2 toys, Tommy has 4 toys. Both boys loose 50% of their toys.

    1 4.00%
Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 127

Thread: "Fair" punishment

  1. #71
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    11-27-17 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: "Fair" punishment

    Quote Originally Posted by pdog View Post
    I never considered this a complex question until recently. I wanted to put it into generic terms and see what kind of responses I got but do it in terms that was a little less loaded. This is largely a social science question regarding concepts like surplus, deprivation, etc.

    This is simply an opinion poll. The boys are the same in each scenario, and you can assume that they misbehaved in the same manner. The number of toys never change. The only thing that changes is the cost of punishment. Choose the one you feel treats both boys with the same degree of punishment and maybe explain why.
    In terms of The word "punishment" the only effective negative reinforcement that is available is to remove all toys. In terms of fairness, equality isn't the preeminent goal but effectiveness is. Punishment shapes behavior, fairness shapes feelings.
    "It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy." Jean Calvin

  2. #72
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,580

    Re: "Fair" punishment

    Quote Originally Posted by pdog View Post
    I never considered this a complex question until recently. I wanted to put it into generic terms and see what kind of responses I got but do it in terms that was a little less loaded. This is largely a social science question regarding concepts like surplus, deprivation, etc.

    This is simply an opinion poll. The boys are the same in each scenario, and you can assume that they misbehaved in the same manner. The number of toys never change. The only thing that changes is the cost of punishment. Choose the one you feel treats both boys with the same degree of punishment and maybe explain why.
    Lets say that Timmy has an X-box and a remote controlled helicopter and that Tommy has two matchbox cars and two stuffed bears. Does that change your idea of equality of deprivation any?
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  3. #73
    Professor
    pdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Searching for answers.
    Last Seen
    06-30-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,969

    Re: "Fair" punishment

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    1) It means that if you punch someone that is more serious than if you insult them.
    That is not, nor has it ever been the question at hand. This is two people punching somebody, period. I have no interest in talking about the arbitrary fine decided by an authority.

    2) What is "this"?
    The numbers you broke down below were my elaboration


    3) The law makers and/or the judge. Using the example of a roadside dumping fine ($15 to $200) the fine amount usually depends on the amount dumped or clean-up time required and may also depend on one's prior dumping convictions.
    But this is the very definition of "appeal to authority." There is no logic that goes into establishing a fine anymore than there is to establishing the number of toys. IT IS ARBITRARY.

    4) All such penalties are arbitrary or you would not have made this poll. The entire idea here seems to be defining the "fair" penalty.
    Exactly. The aspect is from the effect on the punishee.


    5) The severity of the infraction means that punching someone would result in a more severe sentence than for merely insulting someone. If that is too subjective for you then stealing a car is more severe than stealing a plastic flamingo from a residence.
    6) The amount of actual damage to the victim or the amount/probability of potential damage. That is why driving with a BAC of .03 is not as serious a driving with a BAC of .24 thus the penalty for the latter is greater.
    You're comparing, not establishing basis for either of those two examples. You're justifying 'more' which I agree with. But one toy more or 100 toys more is completely arbitrary.

    7) While everyone does not have toys everyone has time.
    Totally, 100% agree. So why do we have penalties in "toys" at all?

    8) In this case, the deprivation time period was fixed, at one week, yet you want us to vary the sentence for the same infraction based on the number of toys that each child has. You seem to think that the number of toys possessed should have some bearing on the sentence imposed while I do not.
    No - I see "all toys" being equal. Neither kid gets to play and must think about their actions. The reality is that this 100% toys option is the same has not making the punishment based on toys at all. It is TIME without toys.

  4. #74
    Professor
    pdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Searching for answers.
    Last Seen
    06-30-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,969

    Re: "Fair" punishment

    Double post, site is acting a little weird.
    Last edited by pdog; 03-20-15 at 06:39 PM.

  5. #75
    Sage
    KevinKohler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,977
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: "Fair" punishment

    Quote Originally Posted by pdog View Post
    I've been clear that I'm interested in the behavioral and punitive aspects of this example, but I don't want to be deceitful and let you believe that this is ONLY about disciplining children. Will I ask you at some point about the application of adults? Maybe. But as stated previously I will entertain the debate of the failed analogy between children and adults if that is your position.
    Well, I'm no parental expert...I have a 5 year old daughter, and a 3 year old son, and frankly, I just kinda make **** up as I go. I think my parents did a pretty bang up job with me, but I can't remember **** from when I was 5. I think that taking things away makes for a better punishment than physical pain or fear, up to a point. Physical pain is over with rather quickly, unless you're a hardcore spanker, at which point...well, we won't get into that. For me, as a kid, the worst was when I KNEW I was getting a spanking when my dad got home, and had to sit around and WAIT for it. My kids are still a bit young for that, IMO, so I take away something equally precious, their time. Time out for me is sitting in a chair facing the wall at the end of the hallway, QUIETLY. The timer doesn't start till you stop crying or yelling or screaming. Works wonders. I don't think I would be physically capable of taking away ALL of their toys. I'd have to lock them in the computer room, and even then, they might have one or two stashed. As for the other argument...punishments between the wealthy and not wealthy will NEVER be fair. They CAN'T be. Good quote from the last Batman movie...."The rich don't even go broke the same...". And that's the truth. You could take away ALL of Warren Buffets money for speeding, and the man would be perfectly fine. He has access to resources the rest of us don't, by virtue of his wealth and reputation. There's no changing that, and all progressive fines will serve to do is make our legal system even worse, more expensive, and more jammed up. Imagine a world where rich people hire lawyers to fight every single fine or citation, instead of just paying them outright?

    The question is what component is fair about a time out (also use them a ton) that isn't present with toys. Why is taking away half of their toys a waste of time. To me it's the relationship of that thing of value to the kid. Both kids have the same amount of time in a day. But if you use a unit that is unequal between those two kids, is a kid that had enough insulation from the punishment really being punished the same?
    Taking away half of their toys does not deprive them of toys. A kid only needs one. I mean, if you had older kids, with a xbox or whatever, would taking away HALF of his video games REALLY hurt him? Not really. Sure, he'll wine for a few minutes, but then he'll realize he's perfectly fine picking up some game he hasn't played in a while. Same with kids and toys. It doesn't....hurt them. It's just not gonna deter them from acting up, the same way taking away ALL of their toys would. And for my money, timeout is SO MUCH EASIER.
    And I should clarify something - this is not about progressive fines, nor did I seek to absolutely defend progressive fines in the other thread. The bigger question to me is can something with a disparity be an effective and fair punishment. I could easily agree with you - it is pointless to try to make a fair punishment out of an arbitrary quantity of toys.
    Effective, yes, as evidenced by a lack of rich people speeding around all over the place...fair? No.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Reports indicate that everyone knew he was hauling a bunch of guns up there. But, since you brought it up, there's something which should be illegal: guns that breakdown.

  6. #76
    Sage
    Crovax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    South Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,557

    Re: "Fair" punishment

    Quote Originally Posted by pdog View Post
    I've been clear that I'm interested in the behavioral and punitive aspects of this example, but I don't want to be deceitful and let you believe that this is ONLY about disciplining children. Will I ask you at some point about the application of adults? Maybe. But as stated previously I will entertain the debate of the failed analogy between children and adults if that is your position.

    The question is what component is fair about a time out (also use them a ton) that isn't present with toys. Why is taking away half of their toys a waste of time. To me it's the relationship of that thing of value to the kid. Both kids have the same amount of time in a day. But if you use a unit that is unequal between those two kids, is a kid that had enough insulation from the punishment really being punished the same?

    And I should clarify something - this is not about progressive fines, nor did I seek to absolutely defend progressive fines in the other thread. The bigger question to me is can something with a disparity be an effective and fair punishment. I could easily agree with you - it is pointless to try to make a fair punishment out of an arbitrary quantity of toys.
    Everything has disparity, all of your punishments are equal and not equal depending on the standard applied

    Hypotheticals are poor debate fodder to begin with and vague hypotheticals are even worse. Why am I punishing the boys, not what action but why am I the arbiter? Are they both my boys, then why did I buy one so many more toys than the other? Is only one my boy, why am I punishing someone elses kid? Am I a teacher of the boys, what right do I have to take away their toys?

  7. #77
    Professor
    pdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Searching for answers.
    Last Seen
    06-30-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,969

    Re: "Fair" punishment

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    Lets say that Timmy has an X-box and a remote controlled helicopter and that Tommy has two matchbox cars and two stuffed bears. Does that change your idea of equality of deprivation any?
    Not if they both have to give up 100% and sit in the same chair :P.

  8. #78
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    11-27-17 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: "Fair" punishment

    Quote Originally Posted by pdog View Post
    I never considered this a complex question until recently. I wanted to put it into generic terms and see what kind of responses I got but do it in terms that was a little less loaded. This is largely a social science question regarding concepts like surplus, deprivation, etc.

    This is simply an opinion poll. The boys are the same in each scenario, and you can assume that they misbehaved in the same manner. The number of toys never change. The only thing that changes is the cost of punishment. Choose the one you feel treats both boys with the same degree of punishment and maybe explain why.
    Deprive both of all toys. This is the only effective negative reinforcement available. In terms of "punishment", the goal is to deprive pleasure in order to shape behavior. In terms of fairness, they receive the same punishment with total deprivation. Keep in mind "loss" and "punishment" are not equivalent terms. A greater loss isn't necessarily a greater punishment and a lesser loss isn't always less punishment. I would also comment that "fairness" is a secondary consideration in the effectiveness of punishment and should not be secondary in other contexts.
    "It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy." Jean Calvin

  9. #79
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,580

    Re: "Fair" punishment

    Quote Originally Posted by pdog View Post
    That is not, nor has it ever been the question at hand. This is two people punching somebody, period. I have no interest in talking about the arbitrary fine decided by an authority.


    The numbers you broke down below were my elaboration



    But this is the very definition of "appeal to authority." There is no logic that goes into establishing a fine anymore than there is to establishing the number of toys. IT IS ARBITRARY.


    Exactly. The aspect is from the effect on the punishee.



    You're comparing, not establishing basis for either of those two examples. You're justifying 'more' which I agree with. But one toy more or 100 toys more is completely arbitrary.

    7) While everyone does not have toys everyone has time.
    Totally, 100% agree. So why do we have penalties in "toys" at all?


    No - I see "all toys" being equal. Neither kid gets to play and must think about their actions. The reality is that this 100% toys option is the same has not making the punishment based on toys at all. It is TIME without toys.
    Why is the one week not equally arbitrary - why not 3 days or a month? Would you advocate eliminating fines as an option, leaving only freedom deprivation (jail or house arrest) as a possible sentence? Fines act as a restitution to society, acting simply as a crime tax, while freedom deprivation has a cost to society as well as to the perp.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  10. #80
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    11-27-17 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: "Fair" punishment

    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    Since Tommy has 4 toys and Timmy only has 2 then the only fair thing would be to have Tommy give Timmy one of his toys so that both have 3. In that way Tommy will feel the sting of the righteous hand of justice and Timmy will be less inclined to misbehave because he is now on the same socioeconomic level as Tommy.

    While it would appear at first glance that taking all toys away from both boys would achieve the same result this would be false. To exercise that option would be to ignore the social benefits of "restorative justice".
    Dear God, I pray this is sarcasm.
    "It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy." Jean Calvin

Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •