> because "bilingual advantage" is subjective Yes, without any further qualifications, "bilingual advantage" is subjective... but then you're making a straw ma

> because "bilingual advantage" is subjective Yes, without any further qualifications, "bilingual advantage" is subjective... but then you're making a straw man argument. Here's that quote again: > Because of enduring experience of managing two languages, bilinguals have been argued to develop superior executive functioning compared with monolinguals. Despite extensive investigation, there is, however, no consensus regarding the existence of such a bilingual advantage The use of "advantage" here is with respect to some measure of "executive functioning", and I see no reason to suspect that in that paper the authors don't fully define what constitutes "executive function". > bordering on defining the purpose of life to become objective Where do the authors suggest anything remotely like this? To step away from the topic at hand for moment: when one speaks of the efficacy of various running techniques, do you immediately dismiss them as if they were presuming that the purpose of life is to come first place in foot races? Your goals in life may not include coming first place in foot races, but that doesn't make the criteria for "winning" the race itself any less objective. Similarly, you may find some or all of the models of "executive function" to be useless for your needs in that ranking high in these models doesn't mean living a prosperous and/or meaningful life for you. And that's perfectly fine, but that doesn't mean that speaking of an advantage with respect to these models is inherently subjective.