Ok... I am going to attempt to simplify this as much as possible for clarification of my claim that maturity cannot be taught.


A = teaching(s) which promotes the liklihood of maturity being actualized

B = maturity

D = life experience

E = cognitive ability

F = controlled environment(school as taught by Abra)





The conditional proposition presented by Abra...

One can be taught B(maturity)

A + F = B.


This is not a sound argument.There are several issues here.

1.) Cognitive ability and countless other variables are not even considered, and when they are it does in fact disprove the argument.

2.) B is contingient upon D

3.) D does not equal F

4.) A + D does not equal F

5.) A + F does not equal D

6.) A + F does not equal B

7.) A + F does not always actualize B


B IS contingient upon A. One cannot concur that A = B. One can also not concur that A + D = B or that A + F = B.

One can, be taught A + D without ever actualizing B.

One can be taught A + F without ever actualizing B.

One's maturity can only be measured against one's self. It requires 'internal growth'. Simply because one acts more mature than their peers does not mean that one was 'taught' maturity.

They were merely given the tools for it to be actualized.It is actualized independant of teaching, or not.


EDIT:

Di, this thead is going along just fine... I just do not have the capability of a broad focus... I would love to discuss whatever you want to... just one thing at a time...please?

Di,

To address your earlier post on 'love'...

You said:

The need that you speak of using the word love – is most often equated on these charts as the need for acceptance.

>>>>>>> Yes... I understand that acceptance is most often used. I would agree that the term acceptence is fine, but it is not quite the same thing, I do not believe. It is impossible to have love without acceptance, however one can indeed have acceptance without having love... So, although I contemplated changing 'love' to 'acceptance', it would indeed not fit in this, my first thesis attempt.<<<<<<<

Di stated:

There is nothing nameless in my reality, there is only the unknown and my desire to learn about it. There is no need inside me, for any greater acceptance or love than I can find within myself, within my circle of peers, or within the rest of the world I feel connected with.

However, I thing to 'create' a nameless entity to fulfill that desire is destructive. It is destructive because it excuses from continueing to analyse our innerself, our own ethics. It allows us to accept our 'faults' rather than to attemp to correct them.


>>>>>>> Di, I fear you have not understood my reasoning behind 'nameless'... It represents that which is within us that is a part of the all... it is 'knowing' inner peace completely, and cannot be actualized while looking out through this world's fingerprint that each of us most probably has had at one point in time, if not still. It is not at all destructive Di, it promotes the very notion of finding that which lies within us... our own self-acceptance while realizing that which deserves not to be lessened in value by adding a name. It is ALL THAT IS...<<<<<<<


Di asked:

How do we achieve a higher ethical view, when so many have ceased analyzing thier own behavior, as it connects with the current world at large?

>>>>>>> We gain a better understanding of the value concerning our own contribution(s)... and we do indeed recognize the capacity of that which lies within each of us and remains nameless, as a result of maintaining absolute value... We recognize that each of us are co-creators, and our decisions affect the all... The problem is that this has not been taught... <<<<<<<

Di, upon your earlier proposition concerning maturity...

You asked:

I have attempted to imagine an individual life, very secluded but very well balanced as far as the kind of teaching, training, logic, etc. that I have discussed. Then putting that person, in the midst of mainstream 'American' life, as an adult. Would they be 'mature' accourding to your description? I would have to say no - but that maturity has little to do with logic and ethics and everything to do with 'expectations'.

In other words, this person would be much like my son at college. With no 'real' experience with which to gage others reaction, this person might well be at a loss of how to interact and be 'socially' accepted. But, logically, that reverts back to the 'acceptence' issue and not a maturity issue, UNLESS, of course, this is exactly what you mean.

>>>>>>> Di, indeed quite a questionable set of circumstances in the first above paragraph. Using your son as an example, I would feel that he could do nothing but gain maturity. Although it may or may not be readily noticable, after the learnings from 'life' filter through the sound judgement abilities you have begun instilling and his view becomes broader and therefore wiser maturity may well be actualized on a level unrecognizable at first, however it will happen, even if one must seemingly be moving 'backwards' in maturity level. Without the exposure to that which one does not 'agree' with there can be no comparitive value assessment... and this internal mechanism yields a product called maturity. It is how one grows 'wiser'...<<<<<<<

Thank you for the simplification. However, I don't agree with a few points......Let me explain.....

I too feel that maturity cannot be taught. I will give an example of why I feel this way.

You have a 57 year old woman who by all accounts seems like a very intelligent, schooled, and has life experience. But her maturity level is that of a 35-37 year old. Then you have a 10 year old who acts like she is 20 and is extremely mature for her age. Why and/or how would that be explained?

And also another factor we will call

g. Kids around adults all their childhood.

I think maturity for kids is not a taught behavior but more of an evironmental behavior. QUESTION: Do you think a child who has siblings around all the time is going to be more mature then a child who is around more adults then kids???


Now for adults again I think that you can have adults that have A through G and are still not mature people. Again I think how the adult was in their childhood totally reflects their maturity as an adult.

feral asked:

You have a 57 year old woman who by all accounts seems like a very intelligent, schooled, and has life experience. But her maturity level is that of a 35-37 year old. Then you have a 10 year old who acts like she is 20 and is extremely mature for her age. Why and/or how would that be explained?

>>>>>>> I believe this has been explained feral, one can only gain maturity when one does an internal value asessment of that which has been learned based upon exposure to that which differs from what has been learned... I will address your examples...

In the case of the 57 year old...

You are asking me to explain to you why YOU feel that she acts like a 35-37 year old. I cannot explain that to you.

A broad generalization, such as 'acts like a 35-37 year old', does not enable one to understand the concept I present. Perhaps there is another way we can think about it...

How is she compared to herself at 35-37?



About the 10 year old...

If the child does in fact display more mature behaviour(s) and thought(s) than 'a 20 year old', it is only as a result of more mature parenting techniques and/or environmental surroundings of THAT child when compared to THAT 20 year old.

Revisit that 10 year old when they are 20, and you will likely witness a 20 year old which acts like a 40 year old, because of the foundation. If you witnessed that 10 year old when he/she was a 20 year old STILL acting like a 20 year old, what would THAT tell you?

It would tell me that the child had experienced very little maturity, even though at 10 they seemed as though they were as mature as a 20 year old...

The values that I placed on Abra's variables merely were done so to represent his proposition... not at all indicative of sound deductive argument...

Your 'G' factor is one of countless more environmental influences which are not always well defined or contained within that example.



feral asked:

QUESTION: Do you think a child who has siblings around all the time is going to be more mature then a child who is around more adults then kids???

ANSWER: A child is going to reflect that which he/she has been exposed to...

The capability of maturity being actualized is indeed contingient upon environmental influence(s), but indeed is realized independantly of any single environmental comparison and/or influence...

Maturity happens only with new exposure(s) an internal comparison of that which does not 'agree' with what one 'knows'... an internal comparitive value assessment... and this internal mechanism yields a product called maturity, assuming that one has been taught what it takes to become a 'mature' person. It is how one grows 'wiser'...<<<<<<<

I would be the first to agree that there are many issues, and I didn’t mean to oversimplify them.

For example, some people have an innate ability to be more mature than others. When I gave my thesis, I only meant it in terms of being much better than what we have. I never intended to imply that it was a miracle cure for perfection.



D = life experience

F = controlled environment(school as taught by Abra)

I would certainly agree with this. However, I think it would be wrong to believe that F does not equal D.

In other words, our learning experiences are indeed very much a part of our life experience. In fact, during our school years the educational environment is a large part of our life experience.

If it is a very inefficient or poor experience that’s certainly going to have a negative affect on much of our lives. In fact, many people say that high school was a huge waste of time. Not to imply that it was unnecessary, but simply to mean that it was extremely inefficient and often boring.

We currently teach students an extreme amount of unnecessary “details” that they neither need to know, nor will even remember!!! We are seriously wasting their time! Time that could have been much better spent in other ways.

I think it’s also impossible for me to convey my ideas of what schools should be like. The difference that I am proposing is so dramatically different that you wouldn’t even recognize it as a regular school. Moreover, in my system guidance counselors would be every bit as important as teachers.

Not for disciplinary actions (which guidance counselors are often seen as). In fact, that is really crazy. In some places it’s considered a bad thing to have been called into the guidance counselor’s office because it’s assumed you did something wrong and are being reprimanded. That’s is totally not the correct function of guidance counselors!

Guidance counselors should do precisely what their title says – Guide. They should help the students find their strengths, their interests, and create organized ways to go about achieving their goals.

In fact, the real focus of my proposed educational program would indeed be on being gold-oriented. The students would have major goals that they would be working toward. Goals that they personally chose via the guidance of the guidance counselors. The students would be involved in their projects would include all of their studies tailored toward their major themes.

They would become involved with their “project” which would hopefully lead toward their careers. And school wouldn’t be a boring exercise of merely learning unrelated facts. Everything they learn would be applied to their “project”.

And yes, this school would take dedicated teachers, and guidance counselors. But one thing I’ve learned through the course of my life is that most teachers would jump at the chance to become involved in such an academic system.

I would love to have the chance to try this in one small place. Just one high school. But for it to work it would need to start early on (at least around grade 5 or so, and up to grade 12). The students that completed my program would be graduating from grade 12 with a better understanding of life than most college students have. And after seeing this system work no one would ever dream of going back to the old system.

Bottom line is that our educational experience through the highschool years IS our life experience in those years!

So during those years it is true that D = F for the most part.

And I would even argue that via my program the students would be encourage to take “school” home with them. In other words, because their “project” is such a personal thing, they would have a greater interest in doing their “homework”. They would see it as building something bigger instead of just being a bunch of unrelated stuff.

Thank you for your input creative. But what happens then when the 57 year old just refuses to get old....Does that have anything to do with maturity as she I am sure has done the internal assessment and she just wants to be that way? Or is their an underlying factor involved. She has indicated many times that she is immature for her age on certain level...

Now the 10 year old is 16 and going on 30....giggle....my daughter....And also creative Is this something that should worry me about her? She is very secure and yes very mature and do you feel that could be a bad thing for someone her age?




Maturity happens only with new exposure(s) an internal comparison of that which does not 'agree' with what one 'knows'... an internal comparitive value assessment... and this internal mechanism yields a product called maturity, assuming that one has been taught what it takes to become a 'mature' person. It is how one grows 'wiser'...<<<<<<<


Again I can't agree ith this 100%.....We will take my daughter as an example again...From the time she could talk and walk people always thought she was older then she was....they were amazed at the maturity level....So was she taught this or was it something just within her self being?

Abra,

I want to say that I completely agree with your assessment and whole-heartedly agree with the notion of what public and private school has been and became in this country... My children are taught how to take a test... because the results of which affect the governments funding to the school...

The priorities are all wrong.

You my friend, would make an exceptional teacher, and most probably were, even in the given system... It is too bad ones like you are the exception rather than the rule...

There is no doubt that we as a people, can indeed teach much more fundamentally sound educational 'tools' and/or principles which would in fact put our population in a better position to move 'forward' on a large scale... allowing the maturity of our people, in general, to view and hold others equal to themselves, while better learning how to use the technology at hand for the common good of all.

The most unfortunate of things though is the realization of the sometimes stark difference(s) within one's own environmental influence(s)...

It is the homelife that teaches one the most through the most common formative years... unfortunately so for many... myself included...

Children learn what they live...

Empathy for those 'outside' of one's immediate 'family or group' is absent in far too many people's hearts, minds, and lives... it is primal instinct within the 'family' and should be taught to be applied outside the family... It very well may be the only true difference between us and other animals... should we be able to promote the growth of empathy...

Competition kills... there IS enough for all, it is not, however, being distributed as evenly as it should...

Capitalism as it is kills empathy for those outside of our 'existence'...

We live in a huge global society that does not agree on human rights let alone ethics...

We as a country, cannot even agree that all are equal...

Our historical ethics were obviously wrong.

very sad creative but very true.

I think if I were a kid again I would of loved to have James as my teacher....Your a gift to any students that come into contact with you. I might not agree with some of what your thinking is...but hey thats what makes the world go around in the first place. Otherwise we would just be a bunch of robots walking around.

feral,

I am not qualified as a behavioural specialist, that is for sure, I can only speak of that to which I have been exposed...

I believe you are confusing two different things...

Behaviour and maturity.

Mature behaviour is a display of what one has learned and does not equate to maturity... comparing one's behaviour against his/her peers is simply that, a comparison between two or more people...

Maturity comes only as a product of one's own internal assessment of what one has been exposed to, and is a reflection of one when compared to themself.

I agree with you on this. Also, some people are into competition while others are not. And those who are not should not be viewed as though they have a weakness. There isn’t any more ‘strength’ in being completive than there is in being ‘greedy’. Either one may get you what you want, but where’s the line between them?

The argument that is often given is that competition is “nature’s way”. This may be true. But if we lower ourselves to that primitive survival tactic then exactly what is it that is supposed to put us above the other animals?

The only thing that sets us apart from the animals is are ability to reason and choose empathy over mere competition to survive. Any argument that favors competition as being “nature’s way” is also an argument that we aren’t any different from the apes. And many people may very well not be much differnet from apes unfortunately.

But for those of us who have evolved above the apes arguments that competition is ‘nature’s way’ just don’t hold water. Empathy, understanding, and intellectual reasoning should always take precedence over mere animalistic survival skills which is indeed what competition represents.

Yet we base our entire free enterprise system on competition, as well as our educational system. Even finding a mate often comes down to a competition. It’s quite sad actually, and shows that many humans are indeed not very highly evolved above animals after all.

Just on a side note, I'd like to acknowledge and agree that the schools can’t do it all. If the parents of the student are teaching them religious prejudices such as being judgmental against gays, or to have a mental block against human knowledge and science then the school isn’t going to be nearly as effective for that student.

It’s difficult to teach students who have been taught by their parents or by their religions to believe in ancient superstitions and prejudices.

I knew we agreed, I just had to convince me of it.

Sometimes my words are far too vague for any definitive assessment...intentionally.

After all these years of humanity existing between the different realities the only hope for this world's good growing on a whole for the whole is indeed an empathetically dominated ethical system for one and all.

Is it possible?

As we well know, it takes much longer to repair damage and rebuild than it does to simply build, and that is a long time.

I like to believe that in this country, modern animation in general has been a good start with the kids and adults alike... much more meaningful than a 'Cinderella story', and an investment into our future.

The only acceptable form of violent retaliation to me is if the perpetrator removes all other reasonable options, and indeed makes it a kill or be killed scenario...

We are quickly becoming a terrible role model for the rest of the world...

EDIT:

In reality we may have always been.

The question of knowledge and in particular the ability to know poses a classic platonic conundrum. If we don't know what we are looking for then how can we possibly recognize it if we stumble across it? On the other hand, if we do know what we are looking for - well enough to recognize it when we see it - then why look in the first place?!



but back to ethics - it is hard to improve upon Aristotle...
who says:

"with respect to acting in the face of danger,
courage is a mean between
the excess of rashness and the deficiency of cowardice;

with respect to the enjoyment of pleasures,
temperance is a mean between
the excess of intemperance and the deficiency of insensibility;

with respect to spending money,
generosity is a mean between
the excess of wastefulness and the deficiency of stinginess;

with respect to relations with strangers,
being friendly is a mean between
the excess of being ingratiating and the deficiency of being surly; and

with respect to self-esteem,
magnanimity is a mean between
the excess of vanity and the deficiency of pusillanimity."

Wait a minute, I’m not done yet!
I still don’t get it. If I had been on top of things, I would have asked the following questions in the beginning.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE MATURE?

How does one act? It seems to me, Creative, that you are equating maturity with ethics. This is exactly what has been so confusing and why, I think, we had so much trouble getting together on this topic.

So are you equating maturity with ethics? Please note, I keep stating ‘ethics’ as I totally separate the word morals from the word ethics. Earlier in this topic Wouldee also replied. While Abra and I were putting our spin on maturity based in ethics, Wouldee put his spin on the same topic with a ‘moral’ basis.

Both, morals and ethics can be taught. Life experience can not. But that being the case, we are NEVER mature, only more experienced, unless you think people cease to have life altering, and ethics altering experiences at some point in their existence.

So perhaps, it might help me to understand what you think maturity is – how it acts, how it thinks, and then I might, too, come to your understanding.

At the moment I rather agree with some of what Farel has said, but on just a little different scale. For example, I know some very well rounded and ethical people, who are extreme thrill seekers.

Know anyone like that Wouldee?

I was always told that was a sign of immaturity, but I don’t see it that way. This is but one example that gets the way of my understanding of what maturity is.

S1owhand - YESSSSS - I do like Aristotle! Very 'mature' statements, for philosopher!

i believe that Aristotle would correlate maturity with the ability to make the choice of moderation. the ability to make the virtuous choice.

however, i also feel that maturity is learned be it described as life experience or as the development of a deeper understanding of ethics or morality. all of these concepts change for an individual as they learn (mature).

Di,

I would ask... Did my previous answers and posts not answer what the concept of maturity means...to me?

Are you asking for further explanation or different?

I would love to address your question(s)...

Can you list them as you have them, and I will amswer as best I can... specifically in relation to how you ask.

I will try...promise...

That is exactly the point I was making to Creative. Maturity is a word defined by the actions of those defining the word.

As Wouldee commented, while those in charge are presenting certain moral behavior, they can not make it relate to those whose choice of life styles is limited to a more meager existence. Thus, maturity, for the sake of a disucssion, must first be defined and the character of maturity made clear, or we will all be discussing different things.

Oh, Creative, I'm afraid our posts overlapped, I didn't see yours before I answered S1owhand.

Maybe I failed to recognise your defining moments. Let me try this.

Maturity, if I understand you, can only come from experiencing events.

But I don't see that this equates to maturity, as we continually, as long as we live, experience and process event that change us. Therefore, our ethics are also subject to change.

So at what point is one considered mature? What must they know, or think, or how must they act, in order to be considered 'mature'?

Without an understanding of what you think the word should mean, I can not agree that maturity can not be taught.

Ethics en Morals are two different things. Free will en conscience, as well. Hmmmm....en ethics change with cultural change, traditional change en so on. Ethics change also with laws. So....think about the word "ETHICAL". It can be rather subjective. Intuitive or reasoned or both?
You may look at the website Edge.org en see a few articles about this from some the leading writers on the topic. May be of interest to you.

Tschuss!