I'm going off of the recent study:

Quote:That's because the nerve cells that connect teenagers' frontal lobes with the rest of their brains are sluggish. Teenagers don't have as much of the fatty coating called myelin, or "white matter," that adults have in this area.

Full Article: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...=124119468

So is it worth it, or just try and trick them? AKA: bullshit and appeal to emotion, authority, straw-man them. basically use any dirty trick to get them to accept a previously reasoned point of view that they might or might not be able to reason out?

FOLLOW UP: Should 18 year-olds be able to vote?

FOLLOW UP FOLLOW UP: Is it right to teach any opinionated text post middle school after (in the best case) they've learned their letters and numbers?

(April 23, 2016 at 5:22 am)Goosebump Wrote: FOLLOW UP: Should 18 year-olds be able to vote?

FOLLOW UP FOLLOW UP: Is it right to teach any opinionated text post middle school after (in the best case) they've learned their letters and numbers?

In my country, the voting age is 16. Same as the liquor age or the smoking age, but for some reason not the driving age, which only starts at 17.

Remembering when I was 16, I don't think it's a good idea to already let them vote. There may be some having the necessary maturity, but what I remember are crude political ideas interwoven with the overwhelming compulsion to get laid and to have a good time. Preferably with lots of beer.

I think 16 is a little young to vote on the whole. No doubt there are some 16 year olds out there who know a bit about politics to make an informed decision, but I don't think most do.

But honestly? If we're going on this basis, why don't we put other restrictions on voting? Why do people with an IQ below 80 get to vote (for example)?

(April 23, 2016 at 5:49 am)Napoléon Wrote: I think 16 is a little young to vote on the whole. No doubt there are some 16 year olds out there who know a bit about politics to make an informed decision, but I don't think most do.

But honestly? If we're going on this basis, why don't we put other restrictions on voting? Why do people with an IQ below 80 get to vote (for example)?

Ability to reason, based on science is a valid point. Ability to reason based on subjectivity is not.

If we can prove somebody with impaired mental faculties cannot reason (regardless of IQ) [remember a teenager with a high IQ still can't reason with full administrative brain function] then you have a case if we assume we feel "reasoning" is a reasonable expectation of a voter. Which, by and large, we do not.

Quote: Why do people with an IQ below 80 get to vote (for example)?

Or run in the first place?

At 16-18, I was still completely under the control of my fundamentalist parents.  I was reasonably bright and necessarily hard-working (I had a part-time job at 15 and straight-A grades) but a debate?  If anyone challenged what I had been taught about religion, or creationism (my parents were young-earth creationists who actually believed that dinosaur fossils were planted on earth by demons) I just avoided them.  I did not dare question.
    If you challenge a teenager who is in this situation, I think that you are doing more harm than good.  I would suggest waiting until they are self-sufficient, and then simply opening up possibilities for scientific education.

(April 23, 2016 at 5:49 am)Napoléon Wrote: I think 16 is a little young to vote on the whole. No doubt there are some 16 year olds out there who know a bit about politics to make an informed decision, but I don't think most do.

But honestly? If we're going on this basis, why don't we put other restrictions on voting? Why do people with an IQ below 80 get to vote (for example)?

And eighteen isn't?

It's not so much debate, but I discuss philosophy with my 14 year old son. He's a Christian, though neither of us attempt to push our viewpoints. We just discuss.

He's actually questioning whether or not he believes in the biblical God, pretty much all on his own, after learning what actually is in the Bible. He largely came to that on his own, however - I can take no credit for it. We had a discussion today, he is struggling with the problem of evil and I tried to honestly represent theistic positions on the matter as well as my own, and left it to him to decide for himself.

I think it's worthwhile but not to the point of taking advantage of a developing intellect.

(As an aside, I was very pleased to learn that they teach basic logic and critical thinking at his school, despite the local area being largely rural and religious.)

(April 23, 2016 at 5:49 am)Napoléon Wrote: But honestly? If we're going on this basis, why don't we put other restrictions on voting? Why do people with an IQ below 80 get to vote (for example)?

Quite simply, because most of us live umder nominally democratic systems we value government by the collective consent of the governed. Disenfranchising the.governed is anathema to that end.

I for one would not want to live under a system where officials had this sort of power.

Even stupid, ignorant people are entitle to have a voice.

(April 24, 2016 at 3:33 am)Bella Morte Wrote: And eighteen isn't?

I can only judge by my own life experiences. The leap between 16 and 18 was quite big. At least when it comes to living in the real world. Bigger than between 10 and 16 I would say.