Amoebe, I said that you shouldn’t punish with intent to harm them, I didn’t imply that any other forms of punishment are good. I acknowledge you can definitely have the best at heart, and still muck things up, but, like Dan says, it’s better to have the best at heart and punish than not have the best at heart and punish.

In my longer post, my alternate reason for punishing was to prevent negative behaviours, which is focused on the punishee, and trying to make everyone better, rather than focusing on the punisher getting their own back.

I can hazard a guess that punishment/discipline in a general environment of love will have a more positive effect on a child than that same punishment/discipline without the love.

In fact, I’d suggest that it would have a more positive effect than no punishment/discipline at all, in an environment of indifference. (or even in an environment of love).

Somehow that sounds quite Kantian to me. It is the motivation behind the punishment that counts, not the punishment per se. The problem is just that the person being punished does not really get to appreciate the difference. If they are being punished by somebody who wishes them well the punishment will have the same effect as when they are being punished by somebody who hopes that the punishment will harm them.
I guess your maxime, Nato, is very much centered on the punisher, rather than the punishee…It might help the punisher be a better person (or just feel better about him/herself), but what exactly does it do for the punishee?