5 ms·

I'm currently a teenager. This is mostly false. I was a teenager -- I dropped out of school, moved out of my parents home, and took a full time technology job

I'm currently a teenager. This is mostly false. I was a teenager -- I dropped out of school, moved out of my parents home, and took a full time technology job at 16, and began working my way up. This meant that by the time my peers graduated from college, I had 6 years of experience under my belt. I wasn't special, I was simply motivated. If my home and school life had been satisfactory, I probably would have been content to sit out my future high school and college years with very little responsibility, and I imagine this is the situation that most teenagers find themselves in. High school works decently enough for the rest of the 95%. 95% of teenagers don't accept real responsibility and behave like capable adults because there is no external motivation or encouragement to do so. Is this beneficial to their well-being? Dropping out is not an option. You 100% will have a much harder time with acceptance with most colleges (and asian parents.) That depends on what you would like to do with your life. Returning to college later in life is surprisingly easy.

Retric 17y ago
If you did something that 99.9999% of the population did not do then you are special by definition. Teenager's have significantly different levels of cognitive ability compared to adults. There is a reason most people look back on their teenage years and say "why was I so stupid" and honestly it's because your brain was less developed on a biological level. http://books.google.com/books?id=2xpvp4ie_8MC&dq=hippocampus+development+teenagers&source=gbs_navlinks_s http://books.google.com/books?id=2xpvp4ie_8MC&dq=hippoca...
- antonovka 17y ago
  If you did something that 99.9999% of the population did not do then you are special by definition. My circumstances were special, not me. Teenager's have significantly different levels of cognitive ability compared to adults. There is a reason most people look back on their teenage years and say "why was I so stupid" and honestly it's because your brain was less developed on a biological level. Cognitive differences do not preclude all responsibility. As it currently stands, most teenagers are provided with none at all, despite their historically demonstrated ability to shoulder considerably more than our institutions provide. I was not special -- I did quite a few phenomenally stupid things as a teenager -- but I also learned how to be an adult sooner. [Edit] One of the dangers of expressing this opinion is that it triggers cognitive dissonance amongst those who did follow the standard protocol. So, allow me to reiterate -- given the proper circumstances, I believe all teenagers are well capable of accepting quite a bit more responsibility than they are currently allowed, but most never have the external encouragement or motivation to do so.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    You are 100% right. It really works like that. If you grow up with little or no opportunity to meet your responsibilities head on and to shoulder your weight you'll lose a decade. Sometimes more. I started working at 17, mailroom boy at first, worked my way up to systems programmer then started my own business. By the time my friends graduated I had a nice little business going. But I doubt if that would have been possible in the period after I got started and before the whole www thing happened. The barrier to entry was pretty high for a long time. I attribute most of what happened to luck and the little bit that's left to plain old fashioned hard work. But then again, I like my work. That really helps.
- wheels 17y ago
  > most people look back on their teenage years and say "why was I so stupid" As far as I can tell, that pattern holds for at least another decade.
  - antonovka 17y ago
    Which is why I tend to believe it has quite a bit more to do with socially encouraged irresponsibility than teenage brain development.
    - wheels 17y ago
      I feel like it's the wrong question. I don't think anyone would really advocate postponing responsibilities until the brain had reached maximum maturity. The responsibility question's function signature is wrong: it's returning a boolean when it should be returning a float.
    - caffeine 17y ago
      This discussion highlights why these questions are so difficult and frightening: ethics prevents good science. Randomly sample a bunch of kids, hook them all up to monitoring devices, put them in different schools and societies that involve transitions into adulthood at different rates and onsets, set up a control group (Lord of the Flies setup), do the longitudinal study, and write it up. An associate professor and his 5 grad students would get a bunch of solid papers out of it. Theorists would have fun defining "optimality" in this context (to be fair, the philosophers have been gnawing at it for a while..) This is unethical .. right? Then, you have to ask yourself: wouldn't it be more ethical to do the study, figure out how best to raise kids, and let all human young for posterity (or at least 'til the results are invalidated) benefit from the wisdom? Hmm.. :)
      - Xichekolas 17y ago
        It would only be more ethical if your ethical system was based on a utilitarian viewpoint. In contrast, most capitalist democracies (all that I can think of anyway) are centered on individualism... the only ethically allowable sacrifice is the voluntary sacrifice... and children (anyone under 18) are not considered sentient enough to make decisions about their own lives and futures.
- nostrademons 17y ago
  Did not or could not? Many people can do a lot more than they actually do do. Just because they choose not to - or are never aware that they have the choice - doesn't make it impossible. Consider spending less than you make (i.e. not going into massive credit card debt). I highly suspect most people can do this - they certainly did just fine up until the 1970s. But many people don't - at least, enough that the savings rate was negative until the current financial crisis. I've heard a few people argue that this proves people are constitutionally incapable of managing money. I think this is bullshit. They're incapable of managing money because the environment and incentives around them provides them no reason to manage their money. If you stopped handing out credit like candy, you'd find that people could very easily manage their finances. So it is with school. Just because 99.99999% of the population doesn't drop out and support themselves while building their career doesn't mean they can't. It just means they find it easier and more imaginable to stay in school.
brianobush 17y ago
[This meant that by the time my peers graduated from college, I had 6 years of experience under my belt.] Invalid assumption, since during my undergrad and graduate years I was exposed/worked on large systems (Vax), administered the math dept systems, tutored statistics/calculus, etc. If I add in the wonderful people I met, studied with or learned from during those college years (something that is hard to find in the common workplace btw), those years are far more valuable that 6 years in the workplace. Experience isn't just putting down years at task X, it is what you gained and the effort you put forth.
- antonovka 17y ago
  College can also be a valuable experience, but you're incredibly presumptuous about working experience as "years at task X" and the value of my experience relative to your education. A degree program provides the opportunity to learn, but no guarantee that you have. Real-world experience provides a measurable demonstration of your abilities. Both are valuable, but for different reasons.
  - brianobush 17y ago
    However, some people have to live with the systems (err nightmares) that were built by people gaining "real-world experience". Just a little bit of focused education can do wonders (esp if you mix in a little passion).
    - antonovka 17y ago
      Why the base insults? Bad code comes from bad and/or inexperienced programmers, which in my experience seems to have very little correlation with level of education, and quite a bit more to do with a lack of "real-world experience".
      - brianobush 17y ago
        no base insults, just what my experience has shown me time and time again.

Retric 17y ago

If you did something that 99.9999% of the population did not do then you are special by definition. Teenager's have significantly different levels of cognitive ability compared to adults. There is a reason most people look back on their teenage years and say "why was I so stupid" and honestly it's because your brain was less developed on a biological level. http://books.google.com/books?id=2xpvp4ie_8MC&dq=hippocampus+development+teenagers&source=gbs_navlinks_s http://books.google.com/books?id=2xpvp4ie_8MC&dq=hippoca...

antonovka 17y ago
If you did something that 99.9999% of the population did not do then you are special by definition. My circumstances were special, not me. Teenager's have significantly different levels of cognitive ability compared to adults. There is a reason most people look back on their teenage years and say "why was I so stupid" and honestly it's because your brain was less developed on a biological level. Cognitive differences do not preclude all responsibility. As it currently stands, most teenagers are provided with none at all, despite their historically demonstrated ability to shoulder considerably more than our institutions provide. I was not special -- I did quite a few phenomenally stupid things as a teenager -- but I also learned how to be an adult sooner. [Edit] One of the dangers of expressing this opinion is that it triggers cognitive dissonance amongst those who did follow the standard protocol. So, allow me to reiterate -- given the proper circumstances, I believe all teenagers are well capable of accepting quite a bit more responsibility than they are currently allowed, but most never have the external encouragement or motivation to do so.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  You are 100% right. It really works like that. If you grow up with little or no opportunity to meet your responsibilities head on and to shoulder your weight you'll lose a decade. Sometimes more. I started working at 17, mailroom boy at first, worked my way up to systems programmer then started my own business. By the time my friends graduated I had a nice little business going. But I doubt if that would have been possible in the period after I got started and before the whole www thing happened. The barrier to entry was pretty high for a long time. I attribute most of what happened to luck and the little bit that's left to plain old fashioned hard work. But then again, I like my work. That really helps.
wheels 17y ago
> most people look back on their teenage years and say "why was I so stupid" As far as I can tell, that pattern holds for at least another decade.
- antonovka 17y ago
  Which is why I tend to believe it has quite a bit more to do with socially encouraged irresponsibility than teenage brain development.
  - wheels 17y ago
    I feel like it's the wrong question. I don't think anyone would really advocate postponing responsibilities until the brain had reached maximum maturity. The responsibility question's function signature is wrong: it's returning a boolean when it should be returning a float.
  - caffeine 17y ago
    This discussion highlights why these questions are so difficult and frightening: ethics prevents good science. Randomly sample a bunch of kids, hook them all up to monitoring devices, put them in different schools and societies that involve transitions into adulthood at different rates and onsets, set up a control group (Lord of the Flies setup), do the longitudinal study, and write it up. An associate professor and his 5 grad students would get a bunch of solid papers out of it. Theorists would have fun defining "optimality" in this context (to be fair, the philosophers have been gnawing at it for a while..) This is unethical .. right? Then, you have to ask yourself: wouldn't it be more ethical to do the study, figure out how best to raise kids, and let all human young for posterity (or at least 'til the results are invalidated) benefit from the wisdom? Hmm.. :)
    - Xichekolas 17y ago
      It would only be more ethical if your ethical system was based on a utilitarian viewpoint. In contrast, most capitalist democracies (all that I can think of anyway) are centered on individualism... the only ethically allowable sacrifice is the voluntary sacrifice... and children (anyone under 18) are not considered sentient enough to make decisions about their own lives and futures.
nostrademons 17y ago
Did not or could not? Many people can do a lot more than they actually do do. Just because they choose not to - or are never aware that they have the choice - doesn't make it impossible. Consider spending less than you make (i.e. not going into massive credit card debt). I highly suspect most people can do this - they certainly did just fine up until the 1970s. But many people don't - at least, enough that the savings rate was negative until the current financial crisis. I've heard a few people argue that this proves people are constitutionally incapable of managing money. I think this is bullshit. They're incapable of managing money because the environment and incentives around them provides them no reason to manage their money. If you stopped handing out credit like candy, you'd find that people could very easily manage their finances. So it is with school. Just because 99.99999% of the population doesn't drop out and support themselves while building their career doesn't mean they can't. It just means they find it easier and more imaginable to stay in school.

brianobush 17y ago

[This meant that by the time my peers graduated from college, I had 6 years of experience under my belt.] Invalid assumption, since during my undergrad and graduate years I was exposed/worked on large systems (Vax), administered the math dept systems, tutored statistics/calculus, etc. If I add in the wonderful people I met, studied with or learned from during those college years (something that is hard to find in the common workplace btw), those years are far more valuable that 6 years in the workplace. Experience isn't just putting down years at task X, it is what you gained and the effort you put forth.

antonovka 17y ago
College can also be a valuable experience, but you're incredibly presumptuous about working experience as "years at task X" and the value of my experience relative to your education. A degree program provides the opportunity to learn, but no guarantee that you have. Real-world experience provides a measurable demonstration of your abilities. Both are valuable, but for different reasons.
- brianobush 17y ago
  However, some people have to live with the systems (err nightmares) that were built by people gaining "real-world experience". Just a little bit of focused education can do wonders (esp if you mix in a little passion).
  - antonovka 17y ago
    Why the base insults? Bad code comes from bad and/or inexperienced programmers, which in my experience seems to have very little correlation with level of education, and quite a bit more to do with a lack of "real-world experience".
    - brianobush 17y ago
      no base insults, just what my experience has shown me time and time again.