Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Kid's Corporal Punishment - a Risk to Mental Health
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="stevevw" data-source="post: 77676811" data-attributes="member: 342064"><p>But that is not an abusive belief on its own. As I have already shown hierarchies are natural and efficent ways ort organising society, organisations, institutions like law and order. We naturally rank people by their competence, the benefits they provide or the imcompetence and problems they cause.</p><p></p><p>So assuming a inherent abusive control to these hierarchies is not only not a fact but is damaging to those good and normal systems which are also hard wired into our cognition.</p><p></p><p>But are you saying that the particular cluster of beliefs you keep mentioning underpin abuse. That is making a value judgement. In fact you have also implied that believing in hierarchies itself underpins abuse.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps thats why this approach gets it wrong so often as it assumes abuse where theres none. By taking the simplistic view it misses important understandings associated with cognition, emotion and psyche. The more aspects that can be identified with abusive and violent controlling beliefs the better we can identify the upstream thinking and psyche that leads to such beliefs.</p><p></p><p>I disagree and I have provided ample evidence for this.</p><p></p><p>But even common sense shows you are wrong. Belief is linked to cognition, emotion and psyche so these aspects have to be involved and also different to non abusers.</p><p></p><p>As you agreed abusers have different thinking patterns to non abusers and we can show we science that they have unreal perceptions of their child and the world. You cannot have unreal expectations and perceptions without cognition and emotion.</p><p></p><p>I think its very much the point. You even acknowledge when you keep saying " it can be perfectly rational from within their own perspective" rather than 'perfectly rational from outside their perspective' for which we should be determining whats real or not.</p><p></p><p>Yes we know people can truely believe what goes on in the isolated minds from outside reality. But we also know that the worlds people create in their subjective heads can be totally detached from reality if they don't test those beliefs in the real world.</p><p></p><p>You do if you don't want to accuse people falsely of holding abusive beliefs.</p><p></p><p>This basically means that just like society has promoted upstream beliefs and ideas that led to abuse in the past. Society is promoting upstream beliefs that promote abuse today. The simple fact that society can create new beliefs or apply the old abusive beliefs to new situations in society and that belief blinds people from seeing the truth we can promote new ways of underpinning abusive beliefs which in fact we are doing today.</p><p></p><p>Like I said, no we don't because there are beliefs being promoted that are not being recognised or acknowledged due to ideological beliefs. You can't use beliefs to determine how we should deal with abuse and violence in society. You need some basis.</p><p></p><p>You missed what I said. I said how do we identify current beliefs that may underpin abuse and violence but have not yet led to abuse and violence or may have already led to abuse and violence but are not being acknowledged due to belief itself. If belief allows society to make abuse acceptable and they are blind to the reality of what harm the beliefs are causing.</p><p></p><p>How do we know that very same situation is not happening now. Those who claim they know the truth about how we should order society to prevent abuse may be basing this truth on their own ideological belief. So just like in the past society is blind or denying the truth due to an ideological belief.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps an example is needed. Without going into detail most of the basis for equality laws and policies is based on DEI ideology. This ideology is promoted as a way to combate abuse and to equalise society. But this ideology actually causes division, abuse and violence. But the ideologues in charge truely believe its good, its the best and only way we should order society and people. This is a modern example of a new belief that is becoming a society norm which actually cultivates abuse and violence.</p><p></p><p>Its designed to measure parents beliefs and attitudes towards child rearing. I would have thought abusive beliefs and attitudes was a central belief in that regard.</p><p></p><p>Out of all the parental belief scales I have never seen one that specifically breaks down and measures hierarchies connected to abuse and violent parenting. So whatever thisw scale is it doesn't seem to exist. I've seen measures that include the wider societal factors such as social norms and attitudes and cultural and religious factors.</p><p></p><p>They may mention that abuse can happen in social hierarchies as part of social norms. But nothing that specifically breaks down which hierarchies exactly cause abuse or explaining how hierarhies can be both abusive or healthy. The go to measures for rational and irrational beliefs is the clinical scales just like we use for other beliefs associated with other human destructive or antisocial behaviour.</p><p></p><p>Actually the belief scales measure both rational and irrational beliefs. So its not only identifying the negative beliefs that underpin abusive, antisocial and destructive behaviour but also the positive beliefs and the healthy cognitions associated.</p><p></p><p>Thats why its comprehensive and more importantly a factual basis rather than some subjective idea that has no basis and will misjudge abuse and accuse innocent people and social settings as abusive when they are not.</p><p></p><p>So you know more than professionals in psychology and cognition. The fact is belief in entangled with cognitions, emotions and feelings. I provided this evdience. You cannot have a belief without the cognitions, emotions and perceptions that underpin that belief.</p><p></p><p>For example a belief that there is a ghost under the bed. You can''t have that belief unless the person has a fear of the dark or some other perception that sees ghosts as real. So the mind is percieving the possibility of ghoses and the emotion is fear, perhaps anxiety. But a sudden belief in scary ghosts doesn't come out of the blue.</p><p></p><p>If this same thing happened to someone who did not have that disposition to believe in scary ghosts they would be saying its just make believe and not real. They would not have a picture in their mind that there are scary ghosts in the world. All belief works this way. You have to first paint the picture in your head as to what the world is like and then you base beliefs on this. Its not the other way around.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps this is the problem that you limit our understand to a very narrow view which stops us from fully understanding why people abuse and become violent.</p><p></p><p>I keep going back to the basic principle which applies to all human behaviour. The only way we can understand this is through a multifaceted level based on the individual, family, community and wider societal determinants. This approached is used for all human behaviour and works because its holistic. Any approach that is not holistic should be viewd with caustion and skepticism.</p><p></p><p>The simple fact that your approach wants to narrow and simply things is the problem without even discussing the details. The approach is wrong in the first place and seems more an ideology than factual.</p><p></p><p>I disagree. As I also said these levels of influence, individual, family, community and wider society are entangled. They cannot be seperated and if you do you are more or less seperating out important factors that help explain and understand the problem in the first place to then make your preventative approach on. If you leave them out then your approach will be misguided and cause more problems.</p><p></p><p>I don't even know how this could be done or that its necessary to do. We can just investigate our current systems, ensure they have checks and balances rather than relaxing them. We can come to understand how humans work, how certain situations in society can be more conducive of promoting abusive control and go from there.</p><p></p><p>We are not dummies and are pretty advances in our behavioural sciences. We can diagnose and predict other behaviours and we get this pretty right. So we just need some factual basis to use which we pretty well know to go by.</p><p></p><p>But this can be hard because of the nature of belief. Two different people can see the same situation differently like I said. One sees words as abuse and the other doesn't. Sometimes even our so called protectors promote abuse believing its the right thing to do. We have to have some independent grounding otherwise theres no way to tell.</p><p></p><p>I think there already pretty relaxed. Its also a case by case basis. Some industries don't have as much flexibility as others. Its not so simple as a unified relaxing.</p><p></p><p>But heres the thing, what if the problem of leave, of having enough time to spend with family and down time is the problem itself. That work has become so dominant that calling for more relaxing of time away from work may be a cry that we are overloaded and that modern society puts too many demands on people, on families.</p><p></p><p>So the belief that we must work, work, work, to buy the house, to get the stuff, to keep up and conform which seems to be and ever increasing expectation may be the root problem. </p><p></p><p>This is an example of a belief that society may think is good, is necessary due to how we have been conditioned to base happiness on things and yet its being pushed onto society as something good. An unreal expectation that is causing people, families and society to breakdown.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="stevevw, post: 77676811, member: 342064"] But that is not an abusive belief on its own. As I have already shown hierarchies are natural and efficent ways ort organising society, organisations, institutions like law and order. We naturally rank people by their competence, the benefits they provide or the imcompetence and problems they cause. So assuming a inherent abusive control to these hierarchies is not only not a fact but is damaging to those good and normal systems which are also hard wired into our cognition. But are you saying that the particular cluster of beliefs you keep mentioning underpin abuse. That is making a value judgement. In fact you have also implied that believing in hierarchies itself underpins abuse. Perhaps thats why this approach gets it wrong so often as it assumes abuse where theres none. By taking the simplistic view it misses important understandings associated with cognition, emotion and psyche. The more aspects that can be identified with abusive and violent controlling beliefs the better we can identify the upstream thinking and psyche that leads to such beliefs. I disagree and I have provided ample evidence for this. But even common sense shows you are wrong. Belief is linked to cognition, emotion and psyche so these aspects have to be involved and also different to non abusers. As you agreed abusers have different thinking patterns to non abusers and we can show we science that they have unreal perceptions of their child and the world. You cannot have unreal expectations and perceptions without cognition and emotion. I think its very much the point. You even acknowledge when you keep saying " it can be perfectly rational from within their own perspective" rather than 'perfectly rational from outside their perspective' for which we should be determining whats real or not. Yes we know people can truely believe what goes on in the isolated minds from outside reality. But we also know that the worlds people create in their subjective heads can be totally detached from reality if they don't test those beliefs in the real world. You do if you don't want to accuse people falsely of holding abusive beliefs. This basically means that just like society has promoted upstream beliefs and ideas that led to abuse in the past. Society is promoting upstream beliefs that promote abuse today. The simple fact that society can create new beliefs or apply the old abusive beliefs to new situations in society and that belief blinds people from seeing the truth we can promote new ways of underpinning abusive beliefs which in fact we are doing today. Like I said, no we don't because there are beliefs being promoted that are not being recognised or acknowledged due to ideological beliefs. You can't use beliefs to determine how we should deal with abuse and violence in society. You need some basis. You missed what I said. I said how do we identify current beliefs that may underpin abuse and violence but have not yet led to abuse and violence or may have already led to abuse and violence but are not being acknowledged due to belief itself. If belief allows society to make abuse acceptable and they are blind to the reality of what harm the beliefs are causing. How do we know that very same situation is not happening now. Those who claim they know the truth about how we should order society to prevent abuse may be basing this truth on their own ideological belief. So just like in the past society is blind or denying the truth due to an ideological belief. Perhaps an example is needed. Without going into detail most of the basis for equality laws and policies is based on DEI ideology. This ideology is promoted as a way to combate abuse and to equalise society. But this ideology actually causes division, abuse and violence. But the ideologues in charge truely believe its good, its the best and only way we should order society and people. This is a modern example of a new belief that is becoming a society norm which actually cultivates abuse and violence. Its designed to measure parents beliefs and attitudes towards child rearing. I would have thought abusive beliefs and attitudes was a central belief in that regard. Out of all the parental belief scales I have never seen one that specifically breaks down and measures hierarchies connected to abuse and violent parenting. So whatever thisw scale is it doesn't seem to exist. I've seen measures that include the wider societal factors such as social norms and attitudes and cultural and religious factors. They may mention that abuse can happen in social hierarchies as part of social norms. But nothing that specifically breaks down which hierarchies exactly cause abuse or explaining how hierarhies can be both abusive or healthy. The go to measures for rational and irrational beliefs is the clinical scales just like we use for other beliefs associated with other human destructive or antisocial behaviour. Actually the belief scales measure both rational and irrational beliefs. So its not only identifying the negative beliefs that underpin abusive, antisocial and destructive behaviour but also the positive beliefs and the healthy cognitions associated. Thats why its comprehensive and more importantly a factual basis rather than some subjective idea that has no basis and will misjudge abuse and accuse innocent people and social settings as abusive when they are not. So you know more than professionals in psychology and cognition. The fact is belief in entangled with cognitions, emotions and feelings. I provided this evdience. You cannot have a belief without the cognitions, emotions and perceptions that underpin that belief. For example a belief that there is a ghost under the bed. You can''t have that belief unless the person has a fear of the dark or some other perception that sees ghosts as real. So the mind is percieving the possibility of ghoses and the emotion is fear, perhaps anxiety. But a sudden belief in scary ghosts doesn't come out of the blue. If this same thing happened to someone who did not have that disposition to believe in scary ghosts they would be saying its just make believe and not real. They would not have a picture in their mind that there are scary ghosts in the world. All belief works this way. You have to first paint the picture in your head as to what the world is like and then you base beliefs on this. Its not the other way around. Perhaps this is the problem that you limit our understand to a very narrow view which stops us from fully understanding why people abuse and become violent. I keep going back to the basic principle which applies to all human behaviour. The only way we can understand this is through a multifaceted level based on the individual, family, community and wider societal determinants. This approached is used for all human behaviour and works because its holistic. Any approach that is not holistic should be viewd with caustion and skepticism. The simple fact that your approach wants to narrow and simply things is the problem without even discussing the details. The approach is wrong in the first place and seems more an ideology than factual. I disagree. As I also said these levels of influence, individual, family, community and wider society are entangled. They cannot be seperated and if you do you are more or less seperating out important factors that help explain and understand the problem in the first place to then make your preventative approach on. If you leave them out then your approach will be misguided and cause more problems. I don't even know how this could be done or that its necessary to do. We can just investigate our current systems, ensure they have checks and balances rather than relaxing them. We can come to understand how humans work, how certain situations in society can be more conducive of promoting abusive control and go from there. We are not dummies and are pretty advances in our behavioural sciences. We can diagnose and predict other behaviours and we get this pretty right. So we just need some factual basis to use which we pretty well know to go by. But this can be hard because of the nature of belief. Two different people can see the same situation differently like I said. One sees words as abuse and the other doesn't. Sometimes even our so called protectors promote abuse believing its the right thing to do. We have to have some independent grounding otherwise theres no way to tell. I think there already pretty relaxed. Its also a case by case basis. Some industries don't have as much flexibility as others. Its not so simple as a unified relaxing. But heres the thing, what if the problem of leave, of having enough time to spend with family and down time is the problem itself. That work has become so dominant that calling for more relaxing of time away from work may be a cry that we are overloaded and that modern society puts too many demands on people, on families. So the belief that we must work, work, work, to buy the house, to get the stuff, to keep up and conform which seems to be and ever increasing expectation may be the root problem. This is an example of a belief that society may think is good, is necessary due to how we have been conditioned to base happiness on things and yet its being pushed onto society as something good. An unreal expectation that is causing people, families and society to breakdown. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Kid's Corporal Punishment - a Risk to Mental Health
Top
Bottom