13-year-olds climbing Everest

[OzzyKP]

Imagining that people reached maturity and (at least) intellectual adulthood in ancient times at the age of 13 is beyond romanticizing primitive cultures. I was kind to call it merely noble savage theory. It's rationalizing the exploitation of children.

People today reach "intellectual adulthood" at 13-15.

I never said any such thing. I said that, on average and with absolute thresholds, people reach adult levels of maturity, independence, responsibility and self actualization AFTER THEY ARE FINISHED WITH PUBERTY.

Different people have different amounts of various factors of maturity and adulthood in various aspects of life, but no children (on average) have ever been adults (on average) in history.

Ah, then the confusion is based on different terms. No one is saying that pre-pubescent children have adult levels of maturity, independence, responsibility and self-actualization. Just that people not long after puberty do.

[OzzyKP]

I think it'll take you siring a few to realise just how ****ing stupid kids are, Ozzy. Seriously- even the smart ones.

It didn't take me long being an Apolyton member to realize how ****ing stupid adults are.

[Ecofarm]

People today reach "intellectual adulthood" at 13-15.

At that age, they've no idea what that even means. They've no significant context. Most adults never reach "intellectual adulthood", but we should at least protect people who have not even reached physical adulthood (that is, finishing puberty).

Just that people not long after puberty do.

Not long after? For some it is never. People have a decent chance of having enough to reasonably defend themselves from exploitation sometime not long after, given that they are subject to social conditioning based upon the average and thus remain vurnerable criminally until their childhood education is complete as well.

So, we have:

1. Physical maturity complete (not just started).
2. Basic level of education, independence and responsibility (I think that should be 18-22).

Those are the most basic and ape-like requirements to engage in relationships. Those of us who are actually adults wouldn't touch anything under 30.

[Jon Miller]

The brain never stops developing.

It is biology that there is huge development in the first few years of life and than again in the teen years.

Lots of connections forming, and then being pruned.

Be honest.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Those are the most basic and ape-like requirements to engage in relationships. Those of us who are actually adults wouldn't touch anything under 30.

In general probably (unfortunately) true, I would say that there are exceptions to that though.

JM

[OzzyKP]

At that age, they've no idea what that even means. They've no significant context. Most adults never reach "intellectual adulthood", but we should at least protect people who have not even reached physical adulthood (that is, finishing puberty).

Not long after? For some it is never. People have a decent chance of having enough to reasonably defend themselves from exploitation sometime not long after, given that they are subject to social conditioning based upon the average and thus remain vurnerable criminally until their childhood education is complete as well.

You are right, some people never get there. You are 100% agreed. If people don't get there by 15 then they never will.

If we restrict youth on the basis of them not being "intellectually adult" and allow many adults who themselves aren't "intellectually adult" then that is a double standard. Why do we have stricter standards for youth than we do for adults? Especially when those stricter standards hurt and curtail the potential of mature youth.

It seems your second point involves the fact that young people are not given the proper tools, training, resources, and empowerment to avoid exploitation and are kept vulnerable by their situation and the laws in society. With that I am also 100% agreed.

The trouble is that we go out of our way currently to keep young people powerless, isolated and helpless. Obviously if we threw a lot more risk at them while they are still powerless & helpless it would be a disaster. The goal however is to empower them so they are no longer helpless and thus equally prepared to handle risk.

That is the way to stop the continual victimhood of youth.

[giblets]

Imagining that people reached maturity and (at least) intellectual adulthood in ancient times at the age of 13 is beyond romanticizing primitive cultures. I was kind to call it merely noble savage theory. It's rationalizing the exploitation of children.

It's plausible that if you took a 13 year old from a thousand years ago and a 13 year old from today they wouldn't be at the same level of maturity. That's what "people were more mature back then" means. I don't think it's intended to mean that a 13 year old from a thousand years would seem as mature as a 20 year old from a thousand years ago, i.e. was done maturing.

As for calling them evil because they did what made sense in that context... I think I'll pass.

[Ecofarm]

In general probably (unfortunately) true, I would say that there are exceptions to that though.

JM

Yeah... if she's 20 something and filty rich/super-genius. And it's not unfortunate that we have intellectual standards.

[Jon Miller]

I do agree with Ozzy that we could promote maturity. It would be best to start doing this with 20somethings, rather than with preteens.

If they screw something up, they pay for it, not their parents. Stuff like this. Work as a preteen/teen/etc to help provide for the family, not just have the parents provide everything/etc.

These two things would do far more than most of the stuff Ozzy campaigns for, to aid in maturity. You can't have maturity and empowerment without responsibility.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Yeah... if she's 20 something and filty rich/super-genius. And it's not unfortunate that we have intellectual standards.

The reason why it is unfortunate is that people don't need to be immature into their 20s (or even worse, 30s/40s/etc).

And I have seen 22 year-olds who better take care of their responsibilities/etc than many 40 year-olds. And know more about who they are.

JM

[Ecofarm]

Anecdotes and individuality are nice but, all else being equal, I'll take the 40 over the 22.

[Jon Miller]

Anecdotes and individuality are nice but, all else (except time/experience) being equal, I'll take the 40 over the 22.

For populations in the millions, 2-sigma is still a large number.

JM

[Ecofarm]

What is 1, 2 and 3 sigma, exactly, in regard to IQ. I mean, what are the numbers.

What is 1, 2 and 3 sigma in regard to minimal adult-maturity, given 18 as an average.

[giblets]

What is 1, 2 and 3 sigma, exactly, in regard to IQ. I mean, what are the numbers.

115, 130, 145 respectively. You'll never guess what 4 sigma is. (Usually. Some tests have a different standard deviation, and there's ratio iq's)

[Ecofarm]

Thx, grib.