The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Should corporal punishment be used in schools ?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/27/2018 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,014 times Debate No: 116062
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




I would like to start by saying that corporal punishment instills values such as discipline and considerate polite behaviour into the day-to-day behaviour of the person who receives the corporal punishment.
About 30 to 40 years ago, corporal punishment was the most common form of punishments in worldwide-schools. While certain countries moved to a more 'progressive' view in education and such, countries like Japan still keep these rules. Now the reason I am arguing for this is because I believe a comeback of this would be beneficial. For example in Japan, where it's ranked 7 out of 65 countries in maths, ranked 4 out of 65 countries in sciences and ranked 4 out of 65 countries in reading. This isn't because of them having a sh*t system, not even, it's just that the other countries are better, but even those countries don't prohibit corporal punishment either, however to be at the top, even if not at the VERY TOP, must make a point.


The first thing I'm going to say is that my opponents claim about corporal punishment instilling values like considerate behavior and discipline are demonstrably false. In a study done by Prof. Victoria Talwar of McGill University, Prof. Stephanie M. Carlson of the University of Minnesota, and Prof. Kang Lee of the University of Toronto showed that corporal punishment had 11 correlations in regards to how it effects children's behavior. 10 of these 11 correlations were negative. These negative correlations included things like increased aggression and more frequent anti social behavior. The only good correlation was an increased compliance to parents orders. However in the end all corporal punishment does is show that might makes right. After all the only reason those children are complying more frequently is because they fear getting hurt. My opponent would have people instill values in their children not by demonstrating compassion and kindness but rather by making them fear him. Or at least that's what the research shows children view corporal punishment as a fear tactic. And ultimately if you are incapable of getting through to your child by talking to them perhaps its your fault and not there's.
As for my opponents claim that japans better academic performance is a result of corporal punishment. Japan does better not because of corporal punishment but because of cram schools and year long schooling with no break. In addition the effects of japans schooling system and society in general has led to them having extremely high suicide rates and having a large percentage of their population being depressed. They are clearly not the group we should model our disciplinary system around. Which is not to disparage japan as there is much we could learn from them but education is not one of them. Until my opponent can show evidence that corporal punishment is the key reason behind japans academic success and that it will not result in a similar societal ill such as the one happening in japan my opponent has no ground to stand on.
Debate Round No. 1


Clearly, your argument was off the hooks, Japan is clearly well known to have had high suicide rates even prior to their current system, including the educational ones. We can also make references to their suicides in WW2, which are quite notable. Sure, not in the same context, but clearly makes a point.

Secondly, we are not taking children's opinions into account in this debate, as they are the main revolving point of this argument. Of course, me and you have both been kids. I was born and raised in a 2nd world country (the Cold War classification of 1st world 2nd world, not the More Economically Developed / Less Economically Developed) and it is simply a matter of fact that even if maybe de jure it is prohibited, corporal punishment has been practiced for years to come.

Thirdly, whether a particular study makes it necessarily factual, with no larger scale studies being done in the field, I say it cannot be necessarily taken into account, but I'll pass it up to the voters.

Now, my last, and grand point, is, I believe corporal punishment is not only good in school, but outside too. Whether in school, or outside, it must have similar effects, and effects of submission from the child's side, no matter how despicable the child considers it, or if it considers it a fear tactic. I don't think I need to use opinions or facts anymore, if you live in the West, you MOST LIKELY see pretty often what people in the EAST (Europe) call 'spoiled children'. This speaks for itself, discipline is key, and it pushes people to working really efficient.


The Japanese educational system has always implemented corporal punishment so my point still stands. While yes they have always had slightly higher suicide rates the facts still show that there suicide rates are at their highest while the students are in high school and college.
Secondly, no where in the debate rules did you state that the children's thoughts could not be taken into account so your dismissal of their opinions on it has no basis. You also stated that it has been practiced for many years. Being a long standing tradition does not justify anything.
Regarding your last point, the problem is your goal is submission which is wrong. A child should not be completely submissive to you, a child should be brought to see why you act the way you do and taught why they should as well. You seem to value being obeyed over the child's individuality. The most telling statement from you is when you said "I don't think I need to use opinions or facts anymore" being that the whole point of a debate is to use facts and reasoning to come to a conclusion i would say that you making that statement is tantamount to forfeiting. In addition as for your statement about discipline being key to efficient work, i'm just going to refer you to google so you can observe a workplace that is lacking in extreme rules and regulation (discipline) that manages to be incredibly efficient.
Debate Round No. 2


Of course I haven't specified anything in the rules, I am simply stating that, for obvious and logical reasons, their opinion isn't taken into account in this, as obviously the only thing that matters is the result.

As for your last point, you believe your child SHOULD be bought to see the way you act. Now again, this isn't a fact you're using here as neither was mine, but either way, the role of a parent is to raise their children to be mature figures who can self-sustain themselves and to make them good citizens, although that is the school's role too. To comply with a parent's upbringing rules serves as one of the basics of this, as a good parent, wouldn't want the harm of a child in anyway. Now obviously they don't want physical harm either way, but if they can get to their goals in that way, I recommend it. We're not talking senselessly beating with a huge stick or whipping until they lose their conscience. I am saying simple beating to assure dominance and compliance.

Also, a workplace regarding extreme rules that works efficiently ? As always that has to do with your political views, whether you are authoritarian or libertarian in this very case.
In my opinion. at this point it has to do with individualism and no peer pressure for competition as is in school and in society overall.

Japan's suicide rate is only the 26th in the list of countries by suicide rates, and the 10th would be South Korea, which is certainly ranked at the top of most systems too, however we cannot say it is/was as necessarily strict as the Japanese educational system and the corporal punishment instilled in there.

When I have made my point that "I do not need to use opinions and facts anymore", it was simply because I have used all the arguments and responses I had on my mind at that time, and ended with a simple statement, a theorem, which cannot be explained or proved, but is factually, true. This does not void my debate in any manner, as it is what it is, a simple debate with no set of rules regarding this matter unless I have made it a rule or stated explicitly that I will not use opinions or facts anymore.


You claim that for obvious and logical reasons children's opinion should not be taken into account. You never explained why they're opinion should not be taken into account you only said that they are close to the matter, however you never explained why being involved in the topic disqualifies them from participating in the discussion. And again you say something that is morally abhorrent with "as obviously the only thing that matters is the result". But if that's how your going to approach it fine lets look at it that way. The result is at I previously stated 10 negative effects on the child with 1 minor benefit, which is a point you dropped by the way meaning that argument flows to me.
Your second paragraph makes no clear counterpoint. You simply state an opinion and avoid trying to counter my point on google being an efficient work place despite not having that much discipline. And since you did not address google that point should flow to me.
Your third paragraph appears to be you arguing against your own point. you say that south Korea is 10th in suicide rate's and then point out they also use corporal punishment which works for my argument. All you say in defense of it is that "e cannot say it is/was as necessarily strict as the Japanese educational system". But we can say that they are also an extremely strict nation when it comes to schooling so your claim is once again unsubstantiated.
Your final paragraph claims that you made a "theorem" which you defined as a thing that cannot be explained or proved but is factually true. That definition is completely wrong a self contradictory. First the actual definition of a theorem is a general proposition not self-evident but proved by a chain of reasoning; a truth established by means of accepted truths. And second the reason your definition is wrong is that if something cannot be explained or proved it is not factually true. How can it be? It cant.
My opponent has dropped several of my points which i shall list here
1.My first point about there being 10 negative effects caused by corporal punishment.
2.My point that he never provided evidence that japan's better educational ranking was due to corporal punishment.
3.That the rate of suicide amongst Japanese school goers is higher than the general populace even taking the nations higher suicide rates into account.
My opponent also never used any sources to prove anything he said while i cited a study in my opening paragraph so that point should flow to me.
My opponent also never gave any moral justification for why his goal was the submission of the child.
My opponent has clearly lost this debate on every level whether it be factual, argumentative, grammatical or just plain practicality.
For all these reasons you should vote con.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.