Comment Probably already been mentioned . . . (Score 1) 397
... but i'm at work, so don't have time to read it all.
The problem with expressing complex social phenomena as a mathematical argument, is that you miss a lot of the subtlety. The argument above shoehorns everything into the idae that treating two groups of smokers is inconsistent. However, it ignores much wider social questions such as responsibility for choices.
Few people argue that cigarettes aren't harmful. The idea is that people who have reached a certain level of maturity can be left to make their own decisions about whether or not they expose themselves to the risk. There's probably very few four year-olds who are mature enough to make a reasoned decision about the risk. Likewise, there's few 40-year olds who are too immature to decide for themselves (arguably . . . ).
Governments have reasoned that it is not practical to legislate that cigarette vendors do not have the time to ascertain whether people are mature enough to reason about the health risks, everytime they buy cigarettes, so set the limit for responsibility at 18.
Even this is a gross simplification of the argument, but at least it begins to hint at questions of agency, choice and government. Things which are difficult to express with syllogistic reasoning.
The problem with expressing complex social phenomena as a mathematical argument, is that you miss a lot of the subtlety. The argument above shoehorns everything into the idae that treating two groups of smokers is inconsistent. However, it ignores much wider social questions such as responsibility for choices.
Few people argue that cigarettes aren't harmful. The idea is that people who have reached a certain level of maturity can be left to make their own decisions about whether or not they expose themselves to the risk. There's probably very few four year-olds who are mature enough to make a reasoned decision about the risk. Likewise, there's few 40-year olds who are too immature to decide for themselves (arguably . . . ).
Governments have reasoned that it is not practical to legislate that cigarette vendors do not have the time to ascertain whether people are mature enough to reason about the health risks, everytime they buy cigarettes, so set the limit for responsibility at 18.
Even this is a gross simplification of the argument, but at least it begins to hint at questions of agency, choice and government. Things which are difficult to express with syllogistic reasoning.
