Is maturity a function of only physical development ? I'd like to think not. Webster says,

mature adj. -turer -turest
1. a. Having reached full natural growth or development: a mature cell. b. Fully developed; ripe: a mature cheese.
2. Of, pertaining to, or characteristic of full development, either mental or physical: mature for her age.

Full development and full natural growth are a touch too abstract to derive a meaningful conclusion. Maturity is a level of evolution which should commensurate the time line on which its measured. I realise evolution may not be the right word for what i'm trying to convey here. But then, metaphysically I think a person is capable of evolving in one lifetime. I'll write more on that some other time when my mood is right.

Coming back to our original topic, a 20 year old cant complain that a 3 year old behaves like a kid that he/she is. Doesnt make sense if that happens right. Infact, thats a good thing. It kinda shows that things are normal, as we understand the meaning of normalcy. It would be wrong to expect too much when its not really a possibility. It would be even more wrong to get judgemental based on those misplaced expectations. On the contrary, I dont see anything wrong in admonishing a 20 year old for not acting like one. In common parlance - juvenile.

There must be some small print in webster which i missed. Under what condition is the above given definition valid. Again, i'd expect to hear the answer as "normal". Under the blanket definition of "normal", i guess even exposure to the real world on a daily basis is included.

Which brings me to what i really wanted to write about. Normal has a fairly unilateral meaning. Anything typical, which conforms to a known standard is normal. Typical of what, what standard. Do all sections of society have the same standards ? Obviously not. A boy born in a slum understands normal as living in a hut, probably disease infected neighbourhood, bordering on , if not, buried in poverty. A boy born in an affluent household knows normal as a healthy life, good education, a secure livelihood.

As these boys live through their respective maturity cycles, how can they finish at the same point knowing that they started so wide apart and grew along totally differernt lines. A far more simplified example would be, would you expect a dangerously under nourished child born in Sudan or some god forsaken place to have the same level of "development" as a child born at the same time in any first world country. What is normal in one world is daily news to the other.

So, i'll retract my previous definiton of maturity being a function of the level of evolution with respect to the point in time when it's measured. Maturity will probably be, the extent of evolution measured with respect to that point in time, keeping in context the conditions that prevail in the external environment.

I dont really care if people agree with this or not, this is my blog and I write what I want.