i Mario,
As the voice of truth, etc. etc, and a self-assured goanetter, I am amazed that you can contradict yourself in the same post. For starters, you do not come between Santosh and me. Perhaps you can take a leaf from that. I have learned to ignore irrelevant chatter. It is a pleasure to respond to someone who makes sense. Kudos for being on-spot that the subject matter is the effect / benefit of "the threat of Punishment". I wish other readers were as perceptive as you. Yet, after your second paragraph below, you elected to take off on a tangent. So permit me to address some of your tangential points. I like when all-and-sundry tell an author what should have been written. The reality is "Negative consequences" (your term) is definitely a form of punishment. This applies in many places, including school or workplace. Examples are, not being selected / elected / appointed to a coveted position or a promotion. "Punishment" is not necessarily restricted to a pink slip / termination of job. The list of "negative consequences" and 'caliberated punishment' can be as long as one may seek. So IMO, contrary to what you and others claim, there it is nothing wrong with the authors' title. The title was well chosen. It was "Threat of Punishment Works, Study Suggests". The title is not - "Punishment Works, Study Suggests". So unfortunately, some did not read the title well enough (not surprising); and chose to respond to their own version of this paper and / or title. "Spare the rod and spoil the child" (my phrase) does not mean "Use the rod every time". So too, threat of punishment during the time of Goa's 17 th century (under a political framework) is not dissimilar to the current practice of using prosecution, fines, imprisonment and capital punishment as a DETERRENCE to crime; in a democratic or dictatorial regime. Yet all offenses (then and now) are not punished with the same punishment. So your statement "Inquisition, where alleged heretics were mercilessly punished and tortured, even put to death, by unspeakably cruel methods" is to use your term "simply codswallop" and hyperbole. You rightly point out, "The salutary effect of some negative consequences for inappropriate behavior makes intuitive common sense." Yet we needed a scientific paper in 2008, to confirm the "intuitive common sense" and that was a point in my post. As a conservative you should be saying, "How many millions to fund and (wasted) time did it take for this study?" Many individuals and institutions today put away "intuitive common sense". Some coddle those displaying "inappropriate behavior" backed with some exquisite explanations. High on this list is the "Nanny Government" that you so abhor. So I do not know if you have a beef with this scientific paper (or me). Likely not! As usual some select to shoot the goanet messenger, perhaps because the message (or scientific paper) is above their level.:=)) Regards, GL ----------- Mario Goveia I may be taking my life in my hands here by entering where even angels fear to tread: between Gilbert Lawrence and Santosh Helekar:-)) However, as the only real voice for truth, reason and peace on Goanet, I must say I am mystified by this thread. In the link posted by Gilbert one sees an announcement of a study that apparently indicates that the "threat of punishment" deters selfish people, who are called "freeloaders" in this article, from breaking rules of normal, civil behavior and encourages them to be considerate of others. In my opinion, the term "punishment" is hyperbole in this article because the examples of "punishment" that are mentioned are not corporal or physical, but more like disapproval and public embarrassment and losing some privilege or "points" in a game. The phrase "negative consequences" would be far more appropriate. The salutory effect of some negative consequences for inappropriate behavior makes intuitive common sense. How Gilbert took this to justify the effectiveness of corporal punishment for children when he likened it to the old adage "Spare the rod and spoil the child" is a total mystery to me. Even more bizarre was his rhetorical question likening corporal punishment in bringing up children with the Inquisition where alleged heretics were mercilessly punished and tortured, even put to death, by unspeakably cruel methods.
