To whom we call “mature”?
Posted by khuram on January 30, 2008
To whom we call “mature”?
The term “mature” denotes completeness in natural growth upto the next phase. For example, an unborn human child usually “matures” in about 9 months. After birth, he/she goes through the process of “natural growth” of body and mind for several years. The stage of “completeness” of this phase is the stage of “maturity”.
Despite these technical meanings, we call a person “mature” if he/she independently takes rightful and better decisions. If he/she honours his/her promises/ words/ commitments and thus proves him/herself trustworthy. If he/she is positively tectful in his/her social interactions. If he/she is able to take proper care of him/herself, his/her family and other dependents. If he/she proves him/herself as the source of dignity and honour for his/her family, other social organizations or may be for his/her country or nation etc.
February 21, 2008 at 2:26 pm
and paradoxically the person is never fully mature…
February 24, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Yes … In “non-technical” sense … persons never fully mature. But technical meaning is absolute. For example maturity date of a Security Bond etc. is absolute. Means that bond “absolutely” matures on its maturity date.
February 24, 2008 at 3:23 pm
if Everything in this world was “technical”, you and I would have been robots.
February 24, 2008 at 9:06 pm
hmmm. I think I need to explain it. Actually “non-technical” meaning is applicable to humans. You and I are humans. Therefore non-technical meanings are applicable to us. It means that we cannot be robots
And see that for “technical” meanings, I had given the example of Security Bond etc. It means that “maturity” has absolute meanings only for non-human things like bonds debentures etc. etc.
So Everything is not “technical”. At least I am not.
February 26, 2008 at 3:12 am
u have serious issues!
April 18, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Sir, I am quite much impressed by the vastness of your knowledge and literary taste, people like you, are what we lack.I am a fsc student and I want to ask some questions irrespective of this essay’s subject: 1. People say that without religion every value would be relative but Burtrand russell disagress and mentions a book “principla ethics” which proves that there is a definite distinction b/w good and bad, than what is the absoluteness of religious codes and belief system?
2. Do we know true nature of things? B. Russell once said, “we don’t know the true nature of things but the relationship b/w them.” Holy Prophet often prayed, ” O God! Grant the knowledge of ultimate nature of things.”
3. Klein bottle proves nothing is inside and nothing is outside. What implications does this notion may have on our space and on God?
4. Isn’t modern science in conflict with Islam since it has a profane character of central importance? Since it denies any authority of high order reality? Since it has divorced from religion and revelation? And if it is so what should be our behaviour and mentality being a scientist while rendering total subjection to intellection( which, Dr. S.H Nasr says, sits in our heart) and revelation and to God?
You can answer them turn by turn. Thanks Humble regards.
April 19, 2008 at 8:39 pm
nice!
You have alot of ideas on different subjects “maturity” umm
maybe it is a sign of maturity if we wait until we are asked then give an opinion!!!
What do you think ?
April 21, 2008 at 4:21 pm
to mr richard price. thanks a lot sir, i be obliged to hear your opinion. humble regards