Published Oct 12th, 2013, 10/12/13 3:57 pm
- 2,059 views, 1 today
- 17
- 4
- 42
133
I've seen so many threads, comments, and forum posts surrounding the whole age vs maturity debate that it's getting annoying. Most people have said one of two things:
While both are halfway true, neither is completely correct. So, it's time to set the record straight.
Age is a very good factor for determining the maturity of a large population, however it is not accurate at all on the individual level.
I am going to draw a comparison to the Body Mass Index, which is in a similar situation as the age vs maturity debacle. The Body Mass Index was created in Belguim between 1830 and 1850 by Adolphe Quetelet in order to create a system of measuring the overall health of a substantial population. A number derived from dividing a person's weight by their height squared (kg/m^2, or (lb/in.^2) * 703) is a good method of determining the overall health of a population in that it generates a rough estimate of the population's overall health, due to the large amount of people balancing out the extremely diverse set of body types. However, on an individual scale, the BMI simply does not work. Why? There are many perfectly healthy people in this world who are very muscular but not incredibly tall (thereby getting a high BMI rating), who are tall but thin (thereby scoring very low on the BMI scale), or are overweight but are otherwise very healthy (scoring high on the BMI scale). Those three types of people are relatively common, are perfectly healthy for the most part, and yet get "unhealthy" ratings on the BMI scale.
This correlates with the age vs maturity debate because both function in a similar fashion. It is safe to assume that, for example, most 12-year-olds can act immaturely at times. However, this does not mean that the 12-year-old reading this now is not mature; what that generalization is saying is that based on observations of large populations of people, 12-year-olds have been known to act immaturely when compared to older groups of people. On a large scale, the first bullet point at the top of this blog holds true, however at the individual level, the second bullet point holds true.
Everyone is different, so don't use a generalization to judge an individual, even if that generalization is true, because generalizations are just that -- a general observation about a large population.
- Age is a very good determination of your maturity, or;
- Age has nothing to do at all with your maturity
While both are halfway true, neither is completely correct. So, it's time to set the record straight.
Age is a very good factor for determining the maturity of a large population, however it is not accurate at all on the individual level.
I am going to draw a comparison to the Body Mass Index, which is in a similar situation as the age vs maturity debacle. The Body Mass Index was created in Belguim between 1830 and 1850 by Adolphe Quetelet in order to create a system of measuring the overall health of a substantial population. A number derived from dividing a person's weight by their height squared (kg/m^2, or (lb/in.^2) * 703) is a good method of determining the overall health of a population in that it generates a rough estimate of the population's overall health, due to the large amount of people balancing out the extremely diverse set of body types. However, on an individual scale, the BMI simply does not work. Why? There are many perfectly healthy people in this world who are very muscular but not incredibly tall (thereby getting a high BMI rating), who are tall but thin (thereby scoring very low on the BMI scale), or are overweight but are otherwise very healthy (scoring high on the BMI scale). Those three types of people are relatively common, are perfectly healthy for the most part, and yet get "unhealthy" ratings on the BMI scale.
This correlates with the age vs maturity debate because both function in a similar fashion. It is safe to assume that, for example, most 12-year-olds can act immaturely at times. However, this does not mean that the 12-year-old reading this now is not mature; what that generalization is saying is that based on observations of large populations of people, 12-year-olds have been known to act immaturely when compared to older groups of people. On a large scale, the first bullet point at the top of this blog holds true, however at the individual level, the second bullet point holds true.
Everyone is different, so don't use a generalization to judge an individual, even if that generalization is true, because generalizations are just that -- a general observation about a large population.
| Tags |
2529094
6
Keke1253
theserversowner
DoreoTheOreo
MrWonderKing12
hery95
ScotsMiser
HoboMaggot
Sophisticated_Trashcan
Travisa Inc
LittleTravisaIncBlockyCube
Create an account or sign in to comment.
EDIT: Also, none of us are fully mentally matured until we are 25, so you can't say a 12 year old is "mature", and don't worry, a 20 year old isn't fully mature either.
Women, in fact, are supposed to age at younger than 25. I doubt they're a large enough majority to matter, but I will just leave that on the record.
Context is key, really. There's a lot of factors that play into someone's presentation, and while age is a big modifier, it's far from the only modifier. See how it works for each individual, at the end of the day.