Charlie Kirk shot in Utah

[laughing dog]

We don't allow people to own nukes too (another thing the founders wouldn't have imagined). Does that "infringe on a basic right"?

I conjecture gun fetishists would say yes if one could get a 3D printer to make them.

 

[Emily Lake]

ITT: people who don't believe physiological brain development is physiological, making complete asses out of themselves.

Versus you who seems to think that somatic development is identical to cognitive development. Of course, you also appear to think that psychological beliefs somehow alter observable reality so...

 

[Emily Lake]

Yes. Under 18, by law. Under 30 or so if one is thinking of emotional development.

PHYSIOLOGICALLY IMMATURE

Are you with a straight face asserting that a 17 year old human is NOT physically mature?

Their outward appearance might not change much after 17 but their brain is still developing, which in turn is reflected in their behavior. Current medical research indicates those changes are pretty much complete at 25 years of age but might take a bit longer in some individuals.

Yes, I'm aware. Thus the term "physiologically".

Brain isn’t physiologically?

Sure sure, having a brain injury is totally going to make your bones shrink in size and change your hair color, right?

Honestly, do you not understand the distinction between somatic and psychological? Your house has a foundation and a physical structure. It also has paint and furniture. All of those are "physical" things sure, but the structural components of the house is what makes it a house, the decor and design gives it personality.

Toni and Arctish are also making a bit of a heap fallacy here. Cognitive development is tied to physical development, and it's true that a 17 year old isn't completely cognitively cooked. But a normal 17 year old is far closer to a 22 year old in terms of cognitive capability, complex thought, executive function, and extrapolative ability than a 12 year old. Cognitive development is a continuum, but it's not a uniform continuum... which is the pretense embedded in Toni's argument. There are developmental stages in humans that are slow processes of building information and compiling knowledge, but there are also stages that include massive leaps in functionality. This isn't mysterious or unknown, and I'm irritated with people pretending that it is somehow magically unknowable.

Very young infants have fairly low cognitive development. For the first few months, almost all of the energy goes to physical growth, and the brain mostly stays focused on "eat, sleep, poop". There's still some cognitive development, largely focused around the parental bond and facial recognition processes, the brain learning how to control eyeballs and process visual and aural stimulation. Then the process shifts priorities for a while, with a change in the inflection of physical growth - more energy investment goes into the neural functions for controlling the body (sit up, crawl, walk, grab, hold, climb) and language acquisition (non-verbal indication and expression of emotion, toddler jargon, basic vocabulary and syntax needed for core communication). Around 2, physical growth slows and enters a fairly linear increase. Between then and about 10, energy is split between increasing size overall and acquiring functional knowledge which is largely "stored facts" about the world around them and the people in it. Between 10 and about 14, height increases a bit more quickly, and the cognitive development of friendship bonds occurs. That's a key period of psychological development, where children start to think about other people from an external perspective rather than their own, and they start to internalize that other people like things that they don't like, and vice versa - they start to understand uniqueness of personality and interest, and that leads to compatibility bonding on shared interests and likes. When puberty hits, there's a huge increase in energy consumption, because there are several really critical developmental steps as they transition from juvenile to adult. There are lots of physical changes, including significant height increases as the long bones lengthen, accretion of bone density and strength, closure of the growth plates, and maturation of the reproductive system. But there are also significant cognitive changes - extrapolative ability and executive function increase substantially, and romantic bonding develops where the communal drives shift from compatibility of personality to compatibility of reproduction and all of the attendant sexual urges. The entire process of puberty takes a few years, but a huge amount of it happens in the course of the first several months. After about 16, the remaining physical changes are really minor in the grand scheme of things, and the cognitive development tends to be focused around executive function and emotional equilibrium.

To oversimplify an analogy... a feline that has just had her first heat isn't completely matured either physically or cognitively, but she's far, far, far more similar in both to a cat than to a kitten - even if she was a kitten just two weeks ago. The impact of puberty is enormous, and it really shouldn't be understated.

 

[Emily Lake]

Pretty much just Grief.
...
So no. I don't see hope. I don't see a path forward. I don't see a single thing that can be done.
...
That, let's take a middle path (which you didn't actually invent by the way) gets filed under camel nose by gun-rights activists. It won't go anywhere.

I don't ascribe to your nihilistic approach. Just because other approaches haven't worked in the past doesn't mean we should give up on trying different variations in the future.

I suppose if you really feel like there's nothing that can be done, you could always immigrate to somewhere with laws that better suit your beliefs, rather then trying to adapt our laws, including adapting our constitution, which requires legislative effort and negotiation rather than just blatant violation.

 

[Emily Lake]

The brain is physiological.

Yes it is. But thoughts and beliefs aren't. If they were, then the schizophrenic down the road who believes himself to be Napoleon would be in charge of France.

 

[Toni]

Yes. Under 18, by law. Under 30 or so if one is thinking of emotional development.

PHYSIOLOGICALLY IMMATURE

Are you with a straight face asserting that a 17 year old human is NOT physically mature?

Their outward appearance might not change much after 17 but their brain is still developing, which in turn is reflected in their behavior. Current medical research indicates those changes are pretty much complete at 25 years of age but might take a bit longer in some individuals.

Yes, I'm aware. Thus the term "physiologically".

Brain isn’t physiologically?

Sure sure, having a brain injury is totally going to make your bones shrink in size and change your hair color, right?

Honestly, do you not understand the distinction between somatic and psychological? Your house has a foundation and a physical structure. It also has paint and furniture. All of those are "physical" things sure, but the structural components of the house is what makes it a house, the decor and design gives it personality.

Toni and Arctish are also making a bit of a heap fallacy here. Cognitive development is tied to physical development, and it's true that a 17 year old isn't completely cognitively cooked. But a normal 17 year old is far closer to a 22 year old in terms of cognitive capability, complex thought, executive function, and extrapolative ability than a 12 year old. Cognitive development is a continuum, but it's not a uniform continuum... which is the pretense embedded in Toni's argument. There are developmental stages in humans that are slow processes of building information and compiling knowledge, but there are also stages that include massive leaps in functionality. This isn't mysterious or unknown, and I'm irritated with people pretending that it is somehow magically unknowable.

Very young infants have fairly low cognitive development. For the first few months, almost all of the energy goes to physical growth, and the brain mostly stays focused on "eat, sleep, poop". There's still some cognitive development, largely focused around the parental bond and facial recognition processes, the brain learning how to control eyeballs and process visual and aural stimulation. Then the process shifts priorities for a while, with a change in the inflection of physical growth - more energy investment goes into the neural functions for controlling the body (sit up, crawl, walk, grab, hold, climb) and language acquisition (non-verbal indication and expression of emotion, toddler jargon, basic vocabulary and syntax needed for core communication). Around 2, physical growth slows and enters a fairly linear increase. Between then and about 10, energy is split between increasing size overall and acquiring functional knowledge which is largely "stored facts" about the world around them and the people in it. Between 10 and about 14, height increases a bit more quickly, and the cognitive development of friendship bonds occurs. That's a key period of psychological development, where children start to think about other people from an external perspective rather than their own, and they start to internalize that other people like things that they don't like, and vice versa - they start to understand uniqueness of personality and interest, and that leads to compatibility bonding on shared interests and likes. When puberty hits, there's a huge increase in energy consumption, because there are several really critical developmental steps as they transition from juvenile to adult. There are lots of physical changes, including significant height increases as the long bones lengthen, accretion of bone density and strength, closure of the growth plates, and maturation of the reproductive system. But there are also significant cognitive changes - extrapolative ability and executive function increase substantially, and romantic bonding develops where the communal drives shift from compatibility of personality to compatibility of reproduction and all of the attendant sexual urges. The entire process of puberty takes a few years, but a huge amount of it happens in the course of the first several months. After about 16, the remaining physical changes are really minor in the grand scheme of things, and the cognitive development tends to be focused around executive function and emotional equilibrium.

To oversimplify an analogy... a feline that has just had her first heat isn't completely matured either physically or cognitively, but she's far, far, far more similar in both to a cat than to a kitten - even if she was a kitten just two weeks ago. The impact of puberty is enormous, and it really shouldn't be understated.

Nobody is underestimating puberty. But by your puberty argument, suddenly 9 year old girls undergoing puberty are more similar to a 16 year old than a 6 year old cognitively and developmentally. I guess that means 11 year olds are ready to become mothers? Mary Kay Letourneau ( and Donald J Trump) did nothing wrong by having sex with very young kids? I’m certain that is not what you mean.

The absolute fact is that a 16 year old can be physically and sexually as mature as a 20 year old ( or conversely, only about as sexually and physically mature as a 12 year old) but that does not mean that cognitively or emotionally they are functioning at the level of a 20 year old. Or even close.

 

[Toni]

Pretty much just Grief.
...
So no. I don't see hope. I don't see a path forward. I don't see a single thing that can be done.
...
That, let's take a middle path (which you didn't actually invent by the way) gets filed under camel nose by gun-rights activists. It won't go anywhere.

I don't ascribe to your nihilistic approach. Just because other approaches haven't worked in the past doesn't mean we should give up on trying different variations in the future.

I suppose if you really feel like there's nothing that can be done, you could always immigrate to somewhere with laws that better suit your beliefs, rather then trying to adapt our laws, including adapting our constitution, which requires legislative effort and negotiation rather than just blatant violation.

Tell that to Trump and the Trumpanzies.

 

[Emily Lake]

Nobody is underestimating puberty. But by your puberty argument, suddenly 9 year old girls undergoing puberty are more similar to a 16 year old than a 6 year old cognitively and developmentally. I guess that means 11 year olds are ready to become mothers? Mary Kay Letourneau ( and Donald J Trump) did nothing wrong by having sex with very young kids? I’m certain that is not what you mean.

Is it possible to talk about any social topic without it having to be about trump? Are you capable of that? I'm really tired of this bullshit. Seriously, why is there this compulsion to make every single thing about trump, to a point where basic common sense gets tossed out a window?

You fucking know that's not what I'm saying. So why the holy fuck do you even insinuate it, other than to try to imply that I think it? Or to try to divert attention away from the core topic? It's a smokescreen and a derail, and it's a very *intentionally* insulting one at that. So please Toni, please knock it off. You're smarter than this, and you know that I am too. What do you get out of school-yard taunts and sophomoric arguments from so?

The absolute fact is that a 16 year old can be physically and sexually as mature as a 20 year old ( or conversely, only about as sexually and physically mature as a 12 year old) but that does not mean that cognitively or emotionally they are functioning at the level of a 20 year old. Or even close.

Nobody said they were functioning at a 20 year old level. YOU however, made the assertion that a 16 year old functions more like a 12 year, and that's absolute and utter bullshit - and you know it.

Yes, I am still shocked and incredulous that you seem to believe that a 16 year old reasons more like a 22 year old than like a 12 year old.

 

[Emily Lake]

Pretty much just Grief.
...
So no. I don't see hope. I don't see a path forward. I don't see a single thing that can be done.
...
That, let's take a middle path (which you didn't actually invent by the way) gets filed under camel nose by gun-rights activists. It won't go anywhere.

I don't ascribe to your nihilistic approach. Just because other approaches haven't worked in the past doesn't mean we should give up on trying different variations in the future.

I suppose if you really feel like there's nothing that can be done, you could always immigrate to somewhere with laws that better suit your beliefs, rather then trying to adapt our laws, including adapting our constitution, which requires legislative effort and negotiation rather than just blatant violation.

Tell that to Trump and the Trumpanzies.

Are you Trump? Do you think Jimmy is a "Trumpanzee"?

Why do you think this is relevant, and why do you think it somehow prevents *us* from having a reasonable discussion among ourselves?

I'm just worn out at this point. Conversations go in circles, and some of you seem to have completely lost the ability to reason and think on your own. Someone says "A is a problem", and it gets met with "Well that guy over there who none of us has every directly interacted with said B so nanny-nanny-boo-boo pthbthtbthtbthtbt!"

 

[Elixir]

I'm just worn out at this point.

Great. You’re catching up to your own rhetoric, which is so old and tired, it’s crashed out drunk on TSwizzle’s doorstep.

 

[Toni]

Pretty much just Grief.
...
So no. I don't see hope. I don't see a path forward. I don't see a single thing that can be done.
...
That, let's take a middle path (which you didn't actually invent by the way) gets filed under camel nose by gun-rights activists. It won't go anywhere.

I don't ascribe to your nihilistic approach. Just because other approaches haven't worked in the past doesn't mean we should give up on trying different variations in the future.

I suppose if you really feel like there's nothing that can be done, you could always immigrate to somewhere with laws that better suit your beliefs, rather then trying to adapt our laws, including adapting our constitution, which requires legislative effort and negotiation rather than just blatant violation.

Tell that to Trump and the Trumpanzies.

Are you Trump? Do you think Jimmy is a "Trumpanzee"?

Why do you think this is relevant, and why do you think it somehow prevents *us* from having a reasonable discussion among ourselves?

I'm just worn out at this point. Conversations go in circles, and some of you seem to have completely lost the ability to reason and think on your own. Someone says "A is a problem", and it gets met with "Well that guy over there who none of us has every directly interacted with said B so nanny-nanny-boo-boo pthbthtbthtbthtbt!"

I agree that you are not understanding my point which was that Trump and his circus do not like the US Constitution or our form of government and there is a strong push, seen here on this forum, to push white women back to some 1950’s or, in some cases, 1850’s model of womanhood, as depicted on black and white television shows.

They are better suited to regimes found in places like Russia, North Korea or Iran.

 

[Toni]

Nobody is underestimating puberty. But by your puberty argument, suddenly 9 year old girls undergoing puberty are more similar to a 16 year old than a 6 year old cognitively and developmentally. I guess that means 11 year olds are ready to become mothers? Mary Kay Letourneau ( and Donald J Trump) did nothing wrong by having sex with very young kids? I’m certain that is not what you mean.

Is it possible to talk about any social topic without it having to be about trump? Are you capable of that? I'm really tired of this bullshit. Seriously, why is there this compulsion to make every single thing about trump, to a point where basic common sense gets tossed out a window?

You fucking know that's not what I'm saying. So why the holy fuck do you even insinuate it, other than to try to imply that I think it? Or to try to divert attention away from the core topic? It's a smokescreen and a derail, and it's a very *intentionally* insulting one at that. So please Toni, please knock it off. You're smarter than this, and you know that I am too. What do you get out of school-yard taunts and sophomoric arguments from so?

The absolute fact is that a 16 year old can be physically and sexually as mature as a 20 year old ( or conversely, only about as sexually and physically mature as a 12 year old) but that does not mean that cognitively or emotionally they are functioning at the level of a 20 year old. Or even close.

Nobody said they were functioning at a 20 year old level. YOU however, made the assertion that a 16 year old functions more like a 12 year, and that's absolute and utter bullshit - and you know it.

Yes, I am still shocked and incredulous that you seem to believe that a 16 year old reasons more like a 22 year old than like a 12 year old.

No, I don’t believe that I wrote that a 16 year old functions more like a 12 year old.

You didn’t even correctly read the part of my post you quoted.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

The brain is physiological.

Yes it is. But thoughts and beliefs aren't. If they were, then the schizophrenic down the road who believes himself to be Napoleon would be in charge of France.

A thought or a belief has to have a physical representation, even if a convoluted set of things, in the real world of the brain. Otherwise, it would not exist. Even invalid thoughts have physicality, though it would be a large confluence of neurons and memory and we do not know what else (yet). A specific invalid thought or belief does not necessitate that the product of the thought or belief manifests in the real world, only that there is some manifestation within the vast physiology of the brain. Otherwise, it would supernaturally be in an abstract soul which does not exist.

Moreover, and more to the point of the topic of discussion, if we look at the difference between, say, late adolescence (16-18) and a more developed adult brain chemistry, let's say, 25 yrs old, we do observe a difference in thought patterns: adolescents engage in riskier behavior because hormones influence brain chemistry and especially because the dopamine-rich reward system of the limbic system develops faster than the prefrontal cortex responsible for impulse control and judgment. Impulsive thoughts can be a thing that exists more frequently in a younger brain because they are spurred on by chemistry but also in addition when the physiology of the prefrontal cortex catches up, a filter can also be put in place for those thoughts.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Pretty much just Grief.
...
So no. I don't see hope. I don't see a path forward. I don't see a single thing that can be done.
...
That, let's take a middle path (which you didn't actually invent by the way) gets filed under camel nose by gun-rights activists. It won't go anywhere.

I don't ascribe to your nihilistic approach.

That is wonderful. Sandy Hook was 13 years ago. The US hasn't done anything. The country festival slaughter in Vegas was 8 years ago.

Just because other approaches haven't worked in the past doesn't mean we should give up on trying different variations in the future.

The approach isn't the problem. The problem is the NRA won and the people lost.

I suppose if you really feel like there's nothing that can be done, you could always immigrate to somewhere with laws that better suit your beliefs, rather then trying to adapt our laws, including adapting our constitution, which requires legislative effort and negotiation rather than just blatant violation.

I totally agree with you, but I'm going to post a flippant remark about you needing to leave the country so you can live somewhere where children aren't being slaughtered in school.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The brain is physiological.

Yes it is. But thoughts and beliefs aren't. If they were, then the schizophrenic down the road who believes himself to be Napoleon would be in charge of France.

Napoleon was exiled from France.... again... in 1815, so no, he wouldn't be in charge of France. Your parallel would work better with if someone down the road thought they were Macron. But no one does that.

 

[Emily Lake]

Nobody is underestimating puberty. But by your puberty argument, suddenly 9 year old girls undergoing puberty are more similar to a 16 year old than a 6 year old cognitively and developmentally. I guess that means 11 year olds are ready to become mothers? Mary Kay Letourneau ( and Donald J Trump) did nothing wrong by having sex with very young kids? I’m certain that is not what you mean.

Is it possible to talk about any social topic without it having to be about trump? Are you capable of that? I'm really tired of this bullshit. Seriously, why is there this compulsion to make every single thing about trump, to a point where basic common sense gets tossed out a window?

You fucking know that's not what I'm saying. So why the holy fuck do you even insinuate it, other than to try to imply that I think it? Or to try to divert attention away from the core topic? It's a smokescreen and a derail, and it's a very *intentionally* insulting one at that. So please Toni, please knock it off. You're smarter than this, and you know that I am too. What do you get out of school-yard taunts and sophomoric arguments from so?

The absolute fact is that a 16 year old can be physically and sexually as mature as a 20 year old ( or conversely, only about as sexually and physically mature as a 12 year old) but that does not mean that cognitively or emotionally they are functioning at the level of a 20 year old. Or even close.

Nobody said they were functioning at a 20 year old level. YOU however, made the assertion that a 16 year old functions more like a 12 year, and that's absolute and utter bullshit - and you know it.

Yes, I am still shocked and incredulous that you seem to believe that a 16 year old reasons more like a 22 year old than like a 12 year old.

No, I don’t believe that I wrote that a 16 year old functions more like a 12 year old.

You didn’t even correctly read the part of my post you quoted.

Toni, that's literally your quote - I changed nothing at all about it.

Are you seriously quibbling that I used the term "functions" with the clear context of cognitive function, where you used the term "reason"?

At the end of the day, it makes not one whit of difference. A 16 year old's cognitive abilities, and their ability to employ extrapolative reasoning, and their executive function is far more like that of a 22 year old than it is like that of a 12 year old.

 

[Emily Lake]

The brain is physiological.

Yes it is. But thoughts and beliefs aren't. If they were, then the schizophrenic down the road who believes himself to be Napoleon would be in charge of France.

A thought or a belief has to have a physical representation, even if a convoluted set of things, in the real world of the brain. Otherwise, it would not exist. Even invalid thoughts have physicality, though it would be a large confluence of neurons and memory and we do not know what else (yet). A specific invalid thought or belief does not necessitate that the product of the thought or belief manifests in the real world, only that there is some manifestation within the vast physiology of the brain. Otherwise, it would supernaturally be in an abstract soul which does not exist.

Moreover, and more to the point of the topic of discussion, if we look at the difference between, say, late adolescence (16-18) and a more developed adult brain chemistry, let's say, 25 yrs old, we do observe a difference in thought patterns: adolescents engage in riskier behavior because hormones influence brain chemistry and especially because the dopamine-rich reward system of the limbic system develops faster than the prefrontal cortex responsible for impulse control and judgment. Impulsive thoughts can be a thing that exists more frequently in a younger brain because they are spurred on by chemistry but also in addition when the physiology of the prefrontal cortex catches up, a filter can also be put in place for those thoughts.

If you look at the difference between a 22 year old and a 12 year old... which is a 16 year old closer to?

 

[Emily Lake]

Pretty much just Grief.
...
So no. I don't see hope. I don't see a path forward. I don't see a single thing that can be done.
...
That, let's take a middle path (which you didn't actually invent by the way) gets filed under camel nose by gun-rights activists. It won't go anywhere.

I don't ascribe to your nihilistic approach.

That is wonderful. Sandy Hook was 13 years ago. The US hasn't done anything. The country festival slaughter in Vegas was 8 years ago.

Just because other approaches haven't worked in the past doesn't mean we should give up on trying different variations in the future.

The approach isn't the problem. The problem is the NRA won and the people lost.

I suppose if you really feel like there's nothing that can be done, you could always immigrate to somewhere with laws that better suit your beliefs, rather then trying to adapt our laws, including adapting our constitution, which requires legislative effort and negotiation rather than just blatant violation.

I totally agree with you, but I'm going to post a flippant remark about you needing to leave the country so you can live somewhere where children aren't being slaughtered in school.

Obviously I DON'T agree with you that nothing can be done. Rather, I think that the majority of the approaches that have been attempted were poorly thought out bad approaches, and that we should try different approaches.

 

[Emily Lake]

The brain is physiological.

Yes it is. But thoughts and beliefs aren't. If they were, then the schizophrenic down the road who believes himself to be Napoleon would be in charge of France.

Napoleon was exiled from France.... again... in 1815, so no, he wouldn't be in charge of France. Your parallel would work better with if someone down the road thought they were Macron. But no one does that.

Are you attempting to be humorous here, or do you genuinely believe you're scoring points in an argument with this?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The brain is physiological.

Yes it is. But thoughts and beliefs aren't. If they were, then the schizophrenic down the road who believes himself to be Napoleon would be in charge of France.

A thought or a belief has to have a physical representation, even if a convoluted set of things, in the real world of the brain. Otherwise, it would not exist. Even invalid thoughts have physicality, though it would be a large confluence of neurons and memory and we do not know what else (yet). A specific invalid thought or belief does not necessitate that the product of the thought or belief manifests in the real world, only that there is some manifestation within the vast physiology of the brain. Otherwise, it would supernaturally be in an abstract soul which does not exist.

Moreover, and more to the point of the topic of discussion, if we look at the difference between, say, late adolescence (16-18) and a more developed adult brain chemistry, let's say, 25 yrs old, we do observe a difference in thought patterns: adolescents engage in riskier behavior because hormones influence brain chemistry and especially because the dopamine-rich reward system of the limbic system develops faster than the prefrontal cortex responsible for impulse control and judgment. Impulsive thoughts can be a thing that exists more frequently in a younger brain because they are spurred on by chemistry but also in addition when the physiology of the prefrontal cortex catches up, a filter can also be put in place for those thoughts.

If you look at the difference between a 22 year old and a 12 year old... which is a 16 year old closer to?

The 16 year old would be closest to a 16 year old.

What they are actually closer to is not remotely relevant. For instance, the one thing the 16 year old has almost nothing of compared to that of a 22 year old... true independent living experience! A 22 year old did college and/or is in the workforce, the 16 year old lives at home. The 22 year old has likely fucked up here and there. The 16 year hasn't yet been in the situations to even make the right or wrong choice. The 22 year old has been in a lot more positions of making decisions that carry heavy permanence than a 16 year old.