Plain speak. Try to use fewer double negatives, you sound like a politician.
You aren't close to Socrates and he ended up dead. Plato is a much better example. You sound as if this is some new learning theory for you. FWIW, I've taught university courses. Socratic method is overrated. Scientific method is superior. Call it a difference between our respective educations.
You could also say all that and its still wrong. There is no more proof for this than your first iteration. The one I bolded is particularly annoying. You need to first establish there are two theories, and you haven't done so. I'm being pedantic, but use of such language in an argument is an attempt to make your opinion sound more weighty than what is it. Maybe not intentionally, but that's how it comes across.
BTW, regarding actual theories, I already gave a reference about the negative effects of physically punishing children. I can provide more if asked.
Good.
You have risk:benefit ratios backwards. My example describes a negative event that might (unlikely) turn out okay. Same for hitting your child. Your example is exactly the opposite. Hitting your kids isn't like a delicious ham sandwich, its more like purposefully driving a car into a pillar. I think you are confusing yourself.
Are those the only choices? Again, you seem to be confusing yourself. Wrong question = answers that are irrelevant.
No kidding. Extremely obvious point, so why mention it? Are you saying that spanking isn't "so bad" compared to other ways you could damage your child? This makes it okay?
Which parent again did you say was with you when you drove the car? Did you drive all the way home only to have your mother spank you for it?
You are a strange one, Williams. You twist around and drift off the main topic and think you are clever doing it.
Here's my take on what you have tried to say so far:
Spanking is an acceptable form of discipline for a child.
-- I disagree on the basis that even if you are lucky enough it turns out 'okay', it is unnecessary.
Belting a child is not acceptable.
-- I agree
Consistent discipline is what is important for teaching children proper behaviour
-- I agree with this as well.
I further state I can provide references both showing that spanking negatively affects children AND that there are other methods that are just as, or more effective, than spanking.
I challenge you to find peer-reviewed, validated studies by professionals that are as convincing for your 'school of thought'. Show me that your *opinion* is sound and based on reason and not just a consequence of some conditioning you were unfortunate enough to experience during your formative years. No opinions. Only data, please.
EDIT - no wonder, you aren't even finished undergrad. I wondered. Anyway, if you want to be a lawyer, you should learn to do research. This^ exercise will be good for you.