if

Yankee wrote:

Yes, Taka, that's how I see it.

Thank you, Amy!

Marius Hancu wrote:

I see where Yankee's coming from and there's some argument for it, but the would at the end of the sentence is decisive, IMO: it's subjunctive because it's a hypothetical situation:

MH,

For your information:

  Remember, just because the modal verb 'would' appears in the main clause, this doesnt mean that the verb in the if clause must be in the subjunctive if the content of that clause is not presupposed to be false

http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/061.html

Taka wrote:

Parents and psychologists got the idea that if real fear and harsh punishment were removed from child training, children would develop into better happier and kinder adults. About the part in red, is it the subjunctive mood, or the simple past?

My initial reaction is that the passage in red reports:

1.  If real fear and harsh punishment are removed from child training, children will develop into better, happier and kinder adults.

However, "ideas" are often proposed in tentative terms. Therefore the red part might also report:

2.  If real fear and harsh punishment were removed from child training, children would develop into better, happier and kinder adults.

(I say "reports", but "pseudo-reports" might be a better term: it's likely that the writer has simply put the "idea" into his own words, without reference to any original formulation.)

MrP

Marius Hancu wrote:

I see where Yankee's coming from and there's some argument for it, but the would at the end of the sentence is decisive, IMO: it's subjunctive because it's a hypothetical situation:

I disagree with that.  It is quite standard to change will to would in reported speech.

Direct quote:  "I will come."
Reported speech:  He said he would come.

I agree that it's not 100% clear whether the subjunctive was intended or not, however when you have a bunch of "converts" enthusiastically talking about what they believe to be the best and what they believe to be the truth, they frequently do not word their beliefs in unreal or tentative terms. 

Yankee wrote:

Marius Hancu wrote: I see where Yankee's coming from and there's some argument for it, but the would at the end of the sentence is decisive, IMO: it's subjunctive because it's a hypothetical situation: I disagree with that.  It is quite standard to change will to would in reported speech. Direct quote:  "I will come." Reported speech:  He said he would come. I agree that it's not 100% clear whether the subjunctive was intended or not, however when you have a bunch of "converts" enthusiastically talking about what they believe to be the best and what they believe to be the truth, they frequently do not word their beliefs in unreal or tentative terms.

Sorry, I don't agree.

The text says:

Parents and psychologists got the idea that
which is tentative, they still play with it, speculate (i.e. subjunctive) about it
not 
Parents and psychologists enthusiastically embraced (and defended) the idea that

Taka wrote:

MrP, Wouldn't another way of seeing it be that if both parents and psychologists at the time had the idea of the subjuncitve-if, then, because of the air of untruth that the subjunctive mood has, it would mean that they were both a bit pessimistic people who thought the removal of real fear and the better development of their children were not really possible, which is less likely?

Well, I must admit, I don't associate the subjunctive with untruth, in type II conditionals: in discussions of possible courses of action, you will often hear "If X were the case, Y would be the case". For me, type II subjunctives in such contexts have an air of holding up an object for all to inspect; whereas a type I structure seems more like making your point with a raised finger.

(If that isn't a little fanciful.)

MrP