3 ms·

> There is truth to the idea that, whether due to life experience or brain development, teenagers struggle with proper decision-making. I don't like the arbitr

> There is truth to the idea that, whether due to life experience or brain development, teenagers struggle with proper decision-making. I don't like the arbitrary nature of age cutoffs, but I would no longer support the idea of giving more political power to anyone under 18. while that's just an anecdote, even if it were the norm, it is also the norm for old people of a sufficient age if it makes you feel better, we can administer cognitive tests to old people and determine at what point they fall into "teenager" level of mental acuity

SamPatt 3y ago
There is much less variance on cognitive ability on the younger end of our lives than the higher end. Arbitrary age limits in youth are unfair, but less unfair than the same on the upper end of life. I had a friend who remained sharp until her mid 90s. I have family members who shouldn't be voting in their early 70s. That range is massive, whereas we can mostly agree that nearly all 14 year olds aren't capable, but most 20 year olds are - unfair but not as vast a range.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  > There is much less variance on cognitive ability on the younger end of our lives than the higher end. I'm not sure that's true. Mental maturity in kids varies widely, too. There are some pretty mentally mature kids changing the world. Look at Greta Thunberg. There are also many fewer years for older people to live with the consequences of their votes. Everything has trade-offs. In this case, the loss would not be as bad as the loss we get from excluding those below 18. Whatever the counterexample of sharp old people, I can think of one for sharp young people. We ignore those exceptions for young people, we can ignore them for old people, too. And if you're worried the old-age cutoff will be too young, just pick whatever age's median mental acuity matches 18 year olds - what's good for the gosling is good for the goose.
- coldpie 3y ago
  Your friend could still vote, just not run for office at 90 years old. This seems like a fine compromise to avoid the Feinstein/McConnell/RBG/etc pattern.

SamPatt 3y ago

There is much less variance on cognitive ability on the younger end of our lives than the higher end. Arbitrary age limits in youth are unfair, but less unfair than the same on the upper end of life. I had a friend who remained sharp until her mid 90s. I have family members who shouldn't be voting in their early 70s. That range is massive, whereas we can mostly agree that nearly all 14 year olds aren't capable, but most 20 year olds are - unfair but not as vast a range.

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
> There is much less variance on cognitive ability on the younger end of our lives than the higher end. I'm not sure that's true. Mental maturity in kids varies widely, too. There are some pretty mentally mature kids changing the world. Look at Greta Thunberg. There are also many fewer years for older people to live with the consequences of their votes. Everything has trade-offs. In this case, the loss would not be as bad as the loss we get from excluding those below 18. Whatever the counterexample of sharp old people, I can think of one for sharp young people. We ignore those exceptions for young people, we can ignore them for old people, too. And if you're worried the old-age cutoff will be too young, just pick whatever age's median mental acuity matches 18 year olds - what's good for the gosling is good for the goose.
coldpie 3y ago
Your friend could still vote, just not run for office at 90 years old. This seems like a fine compromise to avoid the Feinstein/McConnell/RBG/etc pattern.