Age Defines Nothing but Bodily Decay

by midwake

Is the mind of a common human a faulty element of the physical body? Why is it a fact that internal justification for the majority of ideas, morals, and thoughts on any subject is backboned with one reason--that they believe in that way because that 'is how it is said to be'?

'Not old enough to do/have/own/think _____'. How does this really work? I see to some extent, since a couple things you can list would be impractical for certain age levels. Otherwise...what does age define? Age does not control the concept of the individual, it only shows how much time was allowcated so far to shape the individual. In reality, it only shows how long your body has been sitting on this earth.

"Adult", used as a gateway, a word that only shows you have physically been on this earth for reletively a longer period. What does this have to with what is allowed and what is not? Is it not possible to have a common 40 year old with the idiocy and morals of a common 10 year old? Yes, but what about the 30 year age difference. What about it? Nothing. Why can it be used? Because the 40 year old does not enjoy the fact of equality. Where is difference besides that the 40 year old is saggy and rotted. Where do you see logical sense in allowcating through age, it is only defining by stereotypical generalization instead of defining individually.

Call it what you please... phases, depression, trends and' know' that the age shows that they do not tuely know what they are talking about. Maybe for some that is true. Does it always mean all?

Is it possible that a 40 year old wrote this? Or a 10 year old... Is it under, above, or inbetween?

When you cannot see the psysical body but see what you are processing in your mind, you see what you need to. You are listening to the information, not a person speaking.

Age defines how decayed the body is, whereas the actual qualities of the individual reflects what they can and cannot handle or do. The individual defines itself, not the population.