taking teenagers seriously

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Belial » Tue Nov 06, 2007 9:38 pm UTC

You're gonna have to show me this "fair amount of indication." Cause, I'm not buying that the psychology and neurology of adolescence is society, as that would indicate that we can basically alter the biology of an entire species and the way that they grow and mature simply by expecting them to act/behave a certain way.


Their biology? No. Just the way they think. The centers of the brain they use. That's well within the range of social programming.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby zenten » Tue Nov 06, 2007 9:57 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:
Belial wrote:
I would posit that, while that culture might *claim* that he is a "full" man (or whatever), I have a hard time believing that a 30 year old man in that same culture holds the newly made man at the same level as he holds another 30 year old man.


Nor will a 50 year old man hold the 30 year old man at the same level as he would another 50 year old man. That doesn't mean that the 50 year old man is in a totally different stage of life.


No, but the 13 year old *is* in a different stage. You telling me that the day you turned 18, you woke up a different person?



Except when I turned 18 I was now an adult, not an adolescent.

I really am having trouble understanding you here. You are saying that adolescence is a distinct stage in life (and you argue that it's a biologically inherent stage), and at the same time you seem to be arguing that there's no such thing at all as a distinct stage, because transitions are gradual.

Robin S
Posts: 3579
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:02 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Robin S » Tue Nov 06, 2007 10:12 pm UTC

It is easy to compare two people, one 15 and one 30, and say that the former is an adolescent while the latter is an adult. However, there is no clear temporal demarcation between the two.
This is a placeholder until I think of something more creative to put here.

nameless
Fooled you; My name is Inigo Montoya
Posts: 194
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 3:12 am UTC

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby nameless » Tue Nov 06, 2007 10:20 pm UTC

hmm, this is a very interesting topic. Being 16 myself I am very annoyed when people shrug off what I say. I'm not always right, but most of the times people have ignored me they end up asking me for help. I find the double standard a tad bit funny and sad. Maybe it's that people think that since they have lived longer they know more? Then again maybe it's just me.

The one exception I have seen to this is teachers at school. I have had a few teacher who have said that we already know all that we need to know to go get a good job, that we know more than they do (which I would tend to agree with, but thats another thread) and then the teacher who always ask the students for IT help.

Anyway, just my $0.02.
Wayne Weiten wrote:Sexual intercourse is really a pretty simple activity. Most animals execute the act with a minimum of difficulty. However, humans manage to make sexual relations terribly complicated

Robin S
Posts: 3579
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:02 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Robin S » Tue Nov 06, 2007 10:21 pm UTC

Maybe it's that people think that since they have lived longer they know more?
I think it's more that people think they know more, and if they happen to be older they will use that as justification.
This is a placeholder until I think of something more creative to put here.

User avatar
Indon
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:21 pm UTC
Location: Alabama :(
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Indon » Tue Nov 06, 2007 10:29 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:
Indon wrote:Snipped for space


That's fine, but I still maintain that people go through adolescence regardless of their culture, which means that we can't simply talk about puberty.


Which is the subject in contention. What makes adolescence distinct from puberty, except as a social construct?

Now I'm not saying that we shouldn't talk about adolescence. Even if adolescence is purely culture-specific, it's specific to western culture, and so relevant to us. But I enjoy talking about pinpointing what makes adolescence what it is.

22/7 wrote:
Indon wrote:Snipped for space


Well, legally, we certainly treat them as "full-fledged adults." And other than that, you're going to have to be more specific as to how we don't treat them as "adults". Also, you're talking about a culture not treating people who are (in the vast majority of cases) beyond adolescence. In the earlier example we were talking about someone who is in (or more likely at the beginning of) adolescence.


Well, while my culture might *claim* that I am a "full" man, I have a hard time believing that a 30 year old man in my culture holds me, a 23-year old, at the same level that he holds another 30 year old man.

And even then, young adults can't purchase alcohol until they are 21 years of age, and in decades past, the voting age was 21 as well.

22/7 wrote:
Indon wrote:Snipped for space


Absolutely. But I can also say "blue" to describe blueberries. Doesn't mean that "blue" is a full description of blueberries. If you add "and is going through puberty", then you've gotten the gist of it a bit better. You're trying to detach adolescence from puberty, and that cannot be done, as it is a part of it's definition.


Aside from as a culture-specific phenomenon, puberty seems to be the only thing that distinguishes adolescence as a distinct phase of life. So why not just call it "Childhood with puberty" or "Adulthood with puberty", dependent on if the culture declares an adult at sexual maturity, or at an arbitrary, later date?
So, I like talking. So if you want to talk about something with me, feel free to send me a PM.

My blog, now rarely updated.

Image

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:37 pm UTC

Again, very sorry, but this will have to be a short post. It's my birthday and I have to go get my drink on, but I'll be back tomorrow with more.

Belial wrote:
You're gonna have to show me this "fair amount of indication." Cause, I'm not buying that the psychology and neurology of adolescence is society, as that would indicate that we can basically alter the biology of an entire species and the way that they grow and mature simply by expecting them to act/behave a certain way.


Their biology? No. Just the way they think. The centers of the brain they use. That's well within the range of social programming.


And during adolescence, the way you think changes. One of the factors behind this change is puberty, others have to do with the society/culture in which you find yourself. However, I'm highly doubting that society is the sole (or close to it) catalyst and/or guidance of this change.

chaosspawn wrote:Then what is the difference between puberty and adolescence? It seems that the societal change is all that is left.


And we have a winner.

chaosspawn wrote:I agree that adolescence will have happen for any adult because it is explicitly the transition from childhood to adulthood. But puberty is the transition from sexually immature to a sexually mature individual. Yet, it seems to me that the societal changes can be decoupled from the pubescent changes. Basically sexual maturity != adulthood. Thus I see puberty as a seperate process from 'becoming an adult' or 'adolescence.


And here we're running into a confusion (not just with you and me, but with a *lot* of the people who are disagreeing with me here) that comes from the definition of "adult." I've probably been making things worse, since I haven't been paying attention to make sure that I'm only using adult to mean physically or only to mean legally (or culturally), but not changing between the two.

Gotta go party. Be back tomorrow.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
VannA
White
Posts: 1446
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:57 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby VannA » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:55 pm UTC

You're still not making sense.

If you take a child, pre-puberty, and train them to act like an adult, accept adult responsibilities, and do their damnedest to BE an adult, then come post-puberty, they will fit into adult society, they will be able to act appropriately as an adult in that society, and outside of the ageism influences that affect all cultures, and independant of their own competance, they will be treated as an adult of equal standing.

This is how the human race, and its precursors, have been for hundreds of millenia.

Right now, we have an artifical, non-biological extension of childhood (Which I would posit does a *lot* more harm than good.) which you are labelling adolescence. We have created the term adolescence in the last hundred years, mostly because, prior to that, what you are calling adolescence was simply a part of childhood. There have been some cultures that had simliar periods in the past, but non have ever extended the period this far out. None had the life-expectancy to do so.
Jealousy is a disease, love is a healthy condition. The immature mind often mistakes one for the other, or assumes that the greater the love, the greater the jealousy.

User avatar
Indon
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:21 pm UTC
Location: Alabama :(
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Indon » Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:55 pm UTC

VannA wrote:Right now, we have an artifical, non-biological extension of childhood (Which I would posit does a *lot* more harm than good.) which you are labelling adolescence. We have created the term adolescence in the last hundred years, mostly because, prior to that, what you are calling adolescence was simply a part of childhood. There have been some cultures that had simliar periods in the past, but non have ever extended the period this far out. None had the life-expectancy to do so.


While I would agree that adolescence is artificial, I would also posit that in an industrial society, it is neccessary. It simply takes more than 12-15 years of life (7-10 years of schooling) to be able to contribute in a society in which professions are as sophisticated as they are in ours.

Now, no doubt we could go about raising our kids better, to include improving how our culture views and operates adolescence. But I don't think we can get away with treating sexually mature individuals as adults in a sufficiently technologically advanced culture.
So, I like talking. So if you want to talk about something with me, feel free to send me a PM.

My blog, now rarely updated.

Image

User avatar
Eleyras
Posts: 131
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 6:56 am UTC
Location: the computer lab

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Eleyras » Wed Nov 07, 2007 5:51 pm UTC

Indon wrote:While I would agree that adolescence is artificial, I would also posit that in an industrial society, it is neccessary. It simply takes more than 12-15 years of life (7-10 years of schooling) to be able to contribute in a society in which professions are as sophisticated as they are in ours.

Now, no doubt we could go about raising our kids better, to include improving how our culture views and operates adolescence. But I don't think we can get away with treating sexually mature individuals as adults in a sufficiently technologically advanced culture.

Even as an adult, to be fully competitive in our industrial society, you require schooling (college.) This is accomplished in the first four years of legal adulthood, and students are given the responsibilities of an adult: freedom to choose their classes, major, sexual partners, living situation (subject to housing rules), when, where, and what they eat, keeping their space clean and organized, etc. The question I continually ask is - why can't high school be more like college?
At some point, I will remember to sig quotes I find amusing or something.

...once I stop laughing.

User avatar
Indon
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:21 pm UTC
Location: Alabama :(
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Indon » Wed Nov 07, 2007 5:57 pm UTC

Eleyras wrote:Even as an adult, to be fully competitive in our industrial society, you require schooling (college.) This is accomplished in the first four years of legal adulthood, and students are given the responsibilities of an adult: freedom to choose their classes, major, sexual partners, living situation (subject to housing rules), when, where, and what they eat, keeping their space clean and organized, etc. The question I continually ask is - why can't high school be more like college?


Perhaps in a society which respected the education they need to thrive in the society more, but as-is, when reviewing high school and college failure rates, as well as the high number of people who simply elect not to go to college, it may be better to make college more like high school.

Though, there certainly are benefits and downsides to both possibilities.

Hmm. Would this thread be a good place to discuss the possible changes to a culture from setting the standard for adulthood earlier or later, or are we way too far off-topic as it is, I wonder?
So, I like talking. So if you want to talk about something with me, feel free to send me a PM.

My blog, now rarely updated.

Image

malarkie
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 6:21 am UTC
Location: Cloud 8

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby malarkie » Wed Nov 07, 2007 6:54 pm UTC

Indon wrote:While I would agree that adolescence is artificial, I would also posit that in an industrial society, it is neccessary. It simply takes more than 12-15 years of life (7-10 years of schooling) to be able to contribute in a society in which professions are as sophisticated as they are in ours.


Not necessarily correct.
For example, look at how todays adults rarely have the level of technical knowledge (for new things) that the youth does. And our level of technology is rapidly changing. (Except doctors, I want them to have lots of schooling)

As for puberty being inseperable from adolescence, they are seperate.
Many children are as responsible as adults because of the pressures to be so.
(Many) teenagers don't act like adults because they are not expected to.
SecondTalon wrote:
So long as it's sticky and goes well with a taco.

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby aleflamedyud » Wed Nov 07, 2007 7:04 pm UTC

Eleyras wrote:
Indon wrote:While I would agree that adolescence is artificial, I would also posit that in an industrial society, it is neccessary. It simply takes more than 12-15 years of life (7-10 years of schooling) to be able to contribute in a society in which professions are as sophisticated as they are in ours.

Now, no doubt we could go about raising our kids better, to include improving how our culture views and operates adolescence. But I don't think we can get away with treating sexually mature individuals as adults in a sufficiently technologically advanced culture.

Even as an adult, to be fully competitive in our industrial society, you require schooling (college.) This is accomplished in the first four years of legal adulthood, and students are given the responsibilities of an adult: freedom to choose their classes, major, sexual partners, living situation (subject to housing rules), when, where, and what they eat, keeping their space clean and organized, etc. The question I continually ask is - why can't high school be more like college?

I always think, why can't we just cut out middle school and have people in college 3-4 years earlier?
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Wed Nov 07, 2007 10:13 pm UTC

malarkie wrote:Not necessarily correct.
For example, look at how todays adults rarely have the level of technical knowledge (for new things) that the youth does. And our level of technology is rapidly changing. (Except doctors, I want them to have lots of schooling)

That's not really an issue of "schooling isn't important." What you're describing are things like cell phones, computers, digital cameras, etc. These are consumer products that are designed to be easy to use. Also, kids have more free time to spend on this kind of thing, and they learn much more quickly than adults do.

malarkie wrote:As for puberty being inseperable from adolescence, they are seperate.
Many children are as responsible as adults because of the pressures to be so.
(Many) teenagers don't act like adults because they are not expected to.


This is kind of the thrust of my argument. Puberty is a part of adolescence.

VannA wrote:You're still not making sense.

If you take a child, pre-puberty, and train them to act like an adult, accept adult responsibilities, and do their damnedest to BE an adult, then come post-puberty, they will fit into adult society, they will be able to act appropriately as an adult in that society, and outside of the ageism influences that affect all cultures, and independant of their own competance, they will be treated as an adult of equal standing.


Teaching a dog to shake hands does not teach the dog what it means to "shake hands". Much in the same way, you can teach a kid to go through all the motions, you can teach him what things to say and do, even what to think, but you will not have an adult. Their minds won't work the same way, their emotions won't work the same way.

VannA wrote:This is how the human race, and its precursors, have been for hundreds of millenia.

Right now, we have an artifical, non-biological extension of childhood (Which I would posit does a *lot* more harm than good.) which you are labelling adolescence. We have created the term adolescence in the last hundred years, mostly because, prior to that, what you are calling adolescence was simply a part of childhood. There have been some cultures that had simliar periods in the past, but non have ever extended the period this far out. None had the life-expectancy to do so.


Again, adolescence *includes* puberty, they are not the same thing, but puberty is a piece of the puzzle. A big one, at that. And I'm not sure what you mean when you say we created it because it used to be childhood.

Indon wrote:It simply takes more than 12-15 years of life (7-10 years of schooling) to be able to contribute in a society in which professions are as sophisticated as they are in ours.


I would very much agree with this.

To deal with the whole society vs. life stage "adult" thing...
zenten wrote:
22/7 wrote:You telling me that the day you turned 18, you woke up a different person?


Except when I turned 18 I was now an adult, not an adolescent.

I really am having trouble understanding you here. You are saying that adolescence is a distinct stage in life (and you argue that it's a biologically inherent stage), and at the same time you seem to be arguing that there's no such thing at all as a distinct stage, because transitions are gradual.


First of all, when someone turns 18, they are according to society an "adult" but that doesn't mean they are done maturing or that their brains are done rewiring the way they do when they're going through adolescence. There is no clear age/time line for that.

Second part, adolescence is a distinct stage in life, but that does not mean that you can say "adolescence starts at 13 and ends at 18", because biology doesn't allow that. Now, the societal parts of adolescence tend to finish up when you graduate from high school (ish), because at that point you can start working full time, start a family, go off to college, etc., all of which are things society tends to deem the things that "adults" do.

Hopefully that's cleared up some issues that have arisen when using the terms adult and adolescence from a biological/personal POV and a societal POV.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Indon
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:21 pm UTC
Location: Alabama :(
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Indon » Wed Nov 07, 2007 10:31 pm UTC

Eh, I still rather disagree, 22/7. I believe that what makes an adult changes from culture to culture, and a culture in which adulthood comes earlier, simply comes earlier; it's not pavlovian dog-training for a farmer in a less technologically-advanced society to be considered an adult at 14 years old; he is, by the standards of his culture, an adult.

I feel that adolescence is not a universal life stage; I feel that only cultures in which adulthood comes well after physical maturation can cultivate an adolescent stage in their children. I feel that adolescence is not distinguished by puberty, but by how people of the adolescent age bracket are treated by others within the culture.

Thus, if a pubescent individual is treated as an adult, then they aren't an adolescent; they're just an adult going through puberty, the same as if someone in our society were to go through puberty late (and puberty can continue on up to 20 years old in some individuals). If a pubescent individual is treated as a child, I still do not feel they are an adolescent; just a child going through puberty, the same as if someone in our society were to go through puberty early (and puberty can begin as early as 10 in some individuals).

Adolescence is a real life stage in our culture, and should be treated with all the importance we treat any other. But it is not a universal one, and outside of our culture (though the number of cultures which have no adolescence is small and, I would think, shrinking) it may be inapplicable.

That's to clarify what I've been arguing regarding this.
So, I like talking. So if you want to talk about something with me, feel free to send me a PM.

My blog, now rarely updated.

Image

User avatar
VannA
White
Posts: 1446
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:57 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby VannA » Wed Nov 07, 2007 10:34 pm UTC

Indon wrote:
VannA wrote:Stuff I Said


While I would agree that adolescence is artificial, I would also posit that in an industrial society, it is neccessary. It simply takes more than 12-15 years of life (7-10 years of schooling) to be able to contribute in a society in which professions are as sophisticated as they are in ours.

Now, no doubt we could go about raising our kids better, to include improving how our culture views and operates adolescence. But I don't think we can get away with treating sexually mature individuals as adults in a sufficiently technologically advanced culture.


Er.. as opposed to be a master blacksmith or turner/fitter? Apprenticeships that were 6 years long, started at 10 or 8?

1) We school too much, and in totally the wrong things. (More critical thinking and introspective analysis, less rote fact)
2) We need more apprenticeships.
3) We need infrastruture to support transferrence of job skills.
Jealousy is a disease, love is a healthy condition. The immature mind often mistakes one for the other, or assumes that the greater the love, the greater the jealousy.

User avatar
Indon
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:21 pm UTC
Location: Alabama :(
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Indon » Wed Nov 07, 2007 10:39 pm UTC

VannA wrote:Er.. as opposed to be a master blacksmith or turner/fitter? Apprenticeships that were 6 years long, started at 10 or 8?

1) We school too much, and in totally the wrong things. (More critical thinking and introspective analysis, less rote fact)
2) We need more apprenticeships.
3) We need infrastruture to support transferrence of job skills.


While I'm all for more critical thinking and analysis (which would be as much or more schooling, not less), I'm personally very much against apprenticeship.

I feel that such a system does not convey sufficient general education for an individual to be able to function in our society, on a fiscal (investment) level, on a political (voting) level, or even on a, um, 'leisurely' (internet debates :P) level. I can't think of a good descriptor for the last one, but I think you get my point.

As for transferrence of job skills, many jobs (at least, white-collar ones) can get by with a simple transition time in which the replacement is trained by the indidivual being replaced at the job. Continuity documentation helps, too.
So, I like talking. So if you want to talk about something with me, feel free to send me a PM.

My blog, now rarely updated.

Image

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Wed Nov 07, 2007 10:41 pm UTC

Indon wrote:Eh, I still rather disagree, 22/7. I believe that what makes an adult changes from culture to culture, and a culture in which adulthood comes earlier, simply comes earlier; it's not pavlovian dog-training for a farmer in a less technologically-advanced society to be considered an adult at 14 years old; he is, by the standards of his culture, an adult.


I think this right here is the crux of our disagreement. And I'm ok with it.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Phi
Has Proportional Boobs (As rumor has it)
Posts: 470
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 5:35 am UTC
Location: Apple, CA

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Phi » Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:56 am UTC

VannA wrote:1) We school too much, and in totally the wrong things. (More critical thinking and introspective analysis, less rote fact)

I'd like to add to this statement, because I believe it needs to be expanded upon. School isn't a place to learn how to think any longer, it seems to be a place where you sit and do exactly what the person in charge tells you to do. I have seen people make the assumption that English is one of the only classes where actual thinking was taught. Unfortunately, this isn't so nowadays.
Backtracking a little, it is my belief that Math is taught in a tedious fashion with no thinking involved. Memorize a concept, do the same problem twenty times over, and then move on (usually forgetting the concepts along the way). Because of this, I don't actually remember any of the rules taught in Geometry that I haven't used since then. Last year I had a short conversation with my math teacher that amounted to two things: a) that math in school goes in circles, that we don't "build up" b) The math model was never pushed to be fully implemented. It's a shame, and it's the reason why I started talking to my teachers more and paying attention in class less (admittedly a rude decision).
But back to the main point: English isn't actual thinking anymore (it used to be, right? If I'm wrong just tell me, or if this is just my personal experience feel free). Every time I read a novel or poem for English I am told to follow the same steps: Look for symbols, annotate, look for themes, then keep those notes for the essay at the end of the unit. To me, this is much too closely related to the tedious Mathematics class. It would be great if the annotations were actually looking for meaning and that the essays proved a point of any kind, but they aren't and they don't. I can't write to save my life, and I can only spit back out information that I read about in the novel. My English teacher promises to fix that this year, and I hope that she keeps that promise, because I have a long way to go.

(This all coming from a 17-year old still in the High School system)

User avatar
clockworkmonk
I'm on a horse!
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:53 am UTC
Location: Austin

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby clockworkmonk » Thu Nov 08, 2007 7:32 am UTC

In my english classes in high school, (the last being 2005), there was a fair amount of creativity. For the most part, all the analysis was in a class discussion format, and assignments were vague enough to be rather open to however much creativity you were willing to include. (one time this lead me to analysing a sonnet through the use of a Limerick) I did go to a rather unusual public school though. I only remember having one bad teacher. All the others were quite competent, and truly wanted to teach, which makes a huge difference. There were the same issues with the math courses I took, but that was how the material was presented, not the teachers.

And on taking teens seriously, I see no reason not to. I mean, anybody, regardless of age, is capable of idiocy and insight. Sure, teens, (look at me talking, I'm not a teen by four months past) on a whole seem less capable of expressing their thoughts clearly, but so what? just because what is said is unclear doesn't mean its wrong. Doesn't mean its right, but unless you seriously listen, how can you be sure?
418 I'm a teapot

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby aleflamedyud » Thu Nov 08, 2007 8:15 pm UTC

I can't write to save my life[.]

Wrong.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

malarkie
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 6:21 am UTC
Location: Cloud 8

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby malarkie » Fri Nov 09, 2007 8:20 am UTC

22/7 wrote:
malarkie wrote:Not necessarily correct.
For example, look at how todays adults rarely have the level of technical knowledge (for new things) that the youth does. And our level of technology is rapidly changing. (Except doctors, I want them to have lots of schooling)

That's not really an issue of "schooling isn't important." What you're describing are things like cell phones, computers, digital cameras, etc. These are consumer products that are designed to be easy to use. Also, kids have more free time to spend on this kind of thing, and they learn much more quickly than adults do./quote]
Not so. The easy to use part of computers isn't what I am talking about. The average teen knows more about what goes on in a computer and how to twerk and really utilize the computer than almost any adult.
22/7 wrote:
malarkie wrote:As for puberty being inseperable from adolescence, they are seperate.
Many children are as responsible as adults because of the pressures to be so.
(Many) teenagers don't act like adults because they are not expected to.


This is kind of the thrust of my argument. Puberty is a part of adolescence.

I don't understand how that is an arguement for the two being connected.

@ Phi:
My AP english teacher expected us to see the same symbols and metaphors that were in the teachers edition. So you are completely correct.
Luckily for me he was very weak-willed and I just went and connected everything to the pent up sexual urges of the authors.
SecondTalon wrote:

So long as it's sticky and goes well with a taco.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:16 pm UTC

malarkie wrote:
22/7 wrote:This is kind of the thrust of my argument. Puberty is a part of adolescence.
I don't understand how that is an arguement for the two being connected.


It's not. I'm saying I disagree with you.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

malarkie
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 6:21 am UTC
Location: Cloud 8

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby malarkie » Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:08 am UTC

I misread. woops.

Okay, to clarify, you believe that the physiological state of puberty is inseperable from the psychological state of adolescence, yes?
SecondTalon wrote:

So long as it's sticky and goes well with a taco.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Mon Nov 12, 2007 4:12 am UTC

That puberty is a part of adolescence.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby zenten » Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:20 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:That puberty is a part of adolescence.


But do you believe that adolescence always follows from puberty?

After all, literacy is required to read Moby Dick. That does not mean that all literate people read Moby Dick.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Mon Nov 12, 2007 5:30 pm UTC

Literacy is not a part of Moby Dick. It is merely required to *read* Moby Dick.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby zenten » Mon Nov 12, 2007 5:36 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:Literacy is not a part of Moby Dick. It is merely required to *read* Moby Dick.


Right. Are you saying the same thing is true for puberty and adolescence, or are you saying that any culture that has puberty also has adolescence?

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:15 pm UTC

Well, I can't be saying the first, since I just said that puberty is a part of adolescence, and puberty isn't dependent upon culture, and, I believe, neither is adolescence (in terms of whether or not it happens, though culture plays a big part in how it happens and what that looks like).
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby zenten » Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:16 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:Well, I can't be saying the first, since I just said that puberty is a part of adolescence, and puberty isn't dependent upon culture, and, I believe, neither is adolescence (in terms of whether or not it happens, though culture plays a big part in how it happens and what that looks like).


Ok, so the answer to malarkie's question is "yes".

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:38 pm UTC

Ish. I'm not sure I'd say they are inseparable. They tend to coincide, though they don't necessarily need to.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby zenten » Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:02 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:Ish. I'm not sure I'd say they are inseparable. They tend to coincide, though they don't necessarily need to.


Are you saying that the time that they happen does not have to coincide, but both are a biological necessity?

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:09 pm UTC

zenten wrote:Are you saying that the time that they happen does not have to coincide, but both are a biological necessity?


To the first part yes, though they usually do coincide, to the second not really. I don't know whether it's biologically necessary for a species to have a social/psychological transitional period, but I believe that we as humans do experience this.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

malarkie
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 6:21 am UTC
Location: Cloud 8

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby malarkie » Mon Nov 12, 2007 11:32 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:To the first part yes, though they usually do coincide, to the second not really. I don't know whether it's biologically necessary for a species to have a social/psychological transitional period, but I believe that we as humans do experience this.


So puberty and adolescence are seperate things.
Meaning that teenagers do not deserve their bad rap.
SecondTalon wrote:

So long as it's sticky and goes well with a taco.

User avatar
Cryopyre
Posts: 701
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 4:00 am UTC
Location: A desert

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Cryopyre » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:01 am UTC

zenten wrote:Snipped OP


I fear I do this a lot, my arguments rarely make sense. However I think my case is different from the kinds you hate because it's not a failure to think rationally, but rather a failure to get it down on paper in a way that makes clear sense.

Either way it's bad.

Oh and I'm 15
Felstaff wrote:I actually see what religion is to social, economical and perhaps political progress in a similar way to what war is to technological progress.

Gunfingers wrote:Voting is the power to speak your mind. You, apparently, had nothing to say.

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby zenten » Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:41 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:
To the first part yes, though they usually do coincide, to the second not really. I don't know whether it's biologically necessary for a species to have a social/psychological transitional period, but I believe that we as humans do experience this.


Do you believe that it is a biological necessity for all humans to experience adolescence, barring some sort of rare disorder?

Cryopyre wrote:
zenten wrote:Snipped OP


I fear I do this a lot, my arguments rarely make sense. However I think my case is different from the kinds you hate because it's not a failure to think rationally, but rather a failure to get it down on paper in a way that makes clear sense.

Either way it's bad.

Oh and I'm 15


Yeah, I tend to say things that don't make much sense either. Unless your arguments somehow look like a different argument that is dumb, I don't think you fall under what I was talking about.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:29 pm UTC

malarkie wrote:
22/7 wrote:To the first part yes, though they usually do coincide, to the second not really. I don't know whether it's biologically necessary for a species to have a social/psychological transitional period, but I believe that we as humans do experience this.

So puberty and adolescence are seperate things.
Meaning that teenagers do not deserve their bad rap.

They are separate, in the same way that a trigger and a gun are separate.
And you're going to have to expound on the if then statement.

zenten wrote:Do you believe that it is a biological necessity for all humans to experience adolescence, barring some sort of rare disorder?

You're kind of throwing around the word necessity. I don't know that it's a necessity that humans do a lot of the things they do, like grow toenails, but we do. I don't know how much of a "biological necessity" adolescence is, but it is something that happens.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby zenten » Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:45 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:
zenten wrote:Do you believe that it is a biological necessity for all humans to experience adolescence, barring some sort of rare disorder?

You're kind of throwing around the word necessity. I don't know that it's a necessity that humans do a lot of the things they do, like grow toenails, but we do. I don't know how much of a "biological necessity" adolescence is, but it is something that happens.


Right, ok. I would say that it's a biological necessity that people grow toenails, at least for the most part. People can't not grow toenails based on culture (baring damaging the cuticles or something) for instance.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby 22/7 » Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:32 pm UTC

zenten wrote:Right, ok. I would say that it's a biological necessity that people grow toenails, at least for the most part. People can't not grow toenails based on culture (baring damaging the cuticles or something) for instance.

Ok... why? My point is, it's biologically necessary for me to breathe because my cells need oxygen and I'm complex enough that I can't just absorb that necessary oxygen. But I don't know that growing toenails is biologically necessary, because I don't know that humans actually need their toenails. That's why I have issues with calling it biologically necessary.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: taking teenagers seriously

Postby Belial » Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:37 pm UTC

"Biologically mandated" is probably a better term for what Zenten is trying to say.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests