Debate Guide: Teen brain

"With scientists discovering that the brain does not stop developing until 25, we know that minors cannot give consent to sex, so why should we change the law?"

The argument is based on a series of false assumptions:

• Giedd's study refers to impulsiveness. From that, some individuals, such as the writer in the Times have falsely concluded that teenagers are stupid, naturally reckless and need to be controlled or "protected". These are value-judgements. How one interprets the will (or ability) to take risks depends on ones own sensibilities and cultural norms. It is unsurprising then, that most interpretations of the teen brain steer clear of possible adaptive functions or Darwinian explanations and instead focus on pathology and suppression.

• Is sex really something that complex and hard to understand? For example, if there were no taboo, how easy would it be for mentally inferior people to practise safe sex? At its most basic level, enjoying pleasurable sensations is an incredibly simple, instinctual thing.

• Is the AoC viable anyway?

We could of course crank up the irrationality and go on to extend the theory to other groups who tend to be less mentally capable, e.g, low IQs, low grades, mentally ill, or vulnerable, e.g. people of African descent, the poor, the elderly. We could even legislate against the sexual expression of these people and raise the age of consent to 25! After all, that would be logical, wouldn't it?

In summary, the "logical" inference of these pro-AoC arguments from the already compromised body of "teen brain" literature is higly suspect. Your conclusion is based upon a logical leap from physiological (brain development) to cognitive, in that you fail to point out how exactly structure impairs ability on a widespread basis. You then make another logical leap from this half-baked cognitive argument to possible victimological, criminal and legislative implications.

Examples of teen excellence

Call for input! This article has only limited information on a subject which should be covered in greater detail. If you have information to contribute, please consider getting involved or contacting us.

Fallacies and cognitive distortions covered

• Non sequitur fallacy: Age-correlated differences in brain development do not imply inferiority, inability or lack of consent.
• Cognitive distortion: Disqualifying the positive, Magnification.