>An adult is an animal that has reached full growth. The biological definition of adult is an organism that has reached sexual maturity and thus capable of reproduction.
>In the human context, the term adult has meanings associated with social and legal concepts. In contrast to a non-adult or "minor", a legal adult is a person who has attained the age of majority and is therefore regarded as independent, self-sufficient, and responsible. They may also be regarded as "majors". The typical age of attaining adulthood for humans is 18 years, although definition may vary by country.
Merriam-Webster:
>(adjective) fully developed and mature
>(noun) one that is adult; especially: a human being after an age (such as 21) specified by law
Your definition of "adult" is one no one uses.
>Past generations considered this character the bedrock that adult behavior rested upon.
Even if I grant that that's true, why should I care? Past generations killed infants in fields to benefit crops, and captured survivors of battles to enslave them. Appeals to tradition are uncompelling.
"Otherwise"? Uh, no. Let's appeal to neither tradition nor to novelty. Let's instead judge things on their own merits.
But that's totally irrelevant, because the definition of a word is a neutral fact; it's neither good nor bad, it just is. You just tried to appeal to tradition to bring legitimacy to your made-up nonsense. I insist: Even if it was true that past cultures defined "adult" the way you do (which I don't grant), that's not the modern meaning.
I'm 60, and I've never, ever heard of such a definition. Not encoded in law. Not by societies (American middle-class 50s? Nope. Puerto Rican immigrants? Nope. Amish? Nope.).
You made it up.
Were someone to attempt to pinpoint the exact moment you begin talking past each other, this is where I'd say to look. Legally, you're right; legally, we kind of need a hard line to for all kinds of things. Voting, driving, alcohol, cannabis, or tobacco purchase and consumption, the list goes on (even if not everything on the list uses the same line).
Socially, we have no such constraints. We can make case-by-case judgements for ourselves, and disagree with each other. Most notably, we can describe someone as acting like an adult. We can recognize that behaving like an adult, with the responsibilities that go along with that, can be independent from age.
Forgetting we have multiple definitions of "Adult" is reasonable. Nobody is perfect every minute of every day.
Refusing to acknowledge it, even after it's pointed out, is bad form; further, it's against site guidelines asking us each to use reasonable interpretations of each others thoughts and comments.
>Legally, you're right
Cool, but my response doesn't hinge on there being a legal definition of "adult". In fact, the definition I gave was biological, which besides the legal is the definition most people use in casual conversation. When would you say a dog is an adult?
>Most notably, we can describe someone as acting like an adult. We can recognize that behaving like an adult, with the responsibilities that go along with that, can be independent from age.
Sure. But notice that you had to say that acting like an adult is independent from age, and not being an adult is. You wouldn't say that someone who, say, gambled his home is not adult, except figuratively, would you? You wouldn't think he should be entrusted to a guardian and that he should be signed up for school with other children. Regardless of how irresponsible his behavior, he still is an adult in your eyes.
>Refusing to acknowledge it, even after it's pointed out, is bad form
What's been pointed out, exactly? forgetfreeman said something -- something stupid, in my opinion -- I countered it, and they doubled down on it. What, I should just capitulate to anyone who is being insistently stupid?
>it's against site guidelines asking us each to use reasonable interpretations of each others thoughts and comments.
So what's the "reasonable interpretation" for the comment? "An individual who routinely fails to understand the consequences of their actions is by definition not an adult." By all means, tell me what I missed.
It’s far less reasonable to allow companies to advertise and promote that harm as if it’s exciting and beneficial to anyone.
It's still not reasonable from an individual perspective, but good luck enforcing a draconian rule about not drinking alcohol. The harm outweigh the benefit.
But at the same time, there's basically no benefit to consuming alcoholic beverages that could be achieved some other ways,
You actually believe that? Adults shouldn't have the right to get tattooed, get spanked in the bedroom, drink alcohol, eat cake when they're obese?
Make of that what you will.
Note that I didn't say we shouldn't have the right to put alcohol in our bodies. There are also negative consequences to prohibition, as we have seen with the drug war. It's a disaster.
I don't find that interesting. It applies to anything that adults do, even things as basic and "positive" as having a job.
Working 8 hours at 8? Absolutely not.
Working 8 hours at 18? Double it and give it to the next person.
More, I'd argue we should tell people the consequences and make sure they understand them before they do it, which may be tantamount to telling them they shouldn't. So maybe we should tell people not to but not punish them if they do.
Toddlers shouldn't be allowed to play with electric fans. I'm OK with mommies, and even strangers, telling them not to and physically preventing it.