#Civicengagement

A leading neuroscientist is reigniting debate over the voting age by arguing that 16-year-olds possess the cognitive skills needed to cast ballots responsibly, citing both neurological development and international examples as evidence. The discussion, sparked by a recent article in The Times, is gaining traction in countries considering electoral reform—including those, like Thailand, where youth political engagement has surged in recent years.

At a time when several democracies are weighing whether to lower their voting ages, neuroscientific research offers powerful new insights. According to the neuroscientist interviewed by The Times, teenagers aged 16 can reason, reflect, and make considered decisions—skills grounded in “cold cognition,” or logical thinking in calm settings. These cognitive abilities, the expert explains, develop enough by mid-adolescence to underpin mature choices at the ballot box.

Groundbreaking neuroscience research has ignited international debates about democratic participation by demonstrating that 16-year-olds possess the cognitive sophistication necessary for responsible electoral decision-making, challenging traditional assumptions about adolescent political competence that could transform Thailand’s approach to youth civic engagement. Leading brain scientists present compelling evidence that teenagers develop crucial “cold cognition” abilities—logical reasoning under calm conditions—that enable thoughtful ballot choices, while Thailand’s recent surge in youth political activism provides real-world validation of adolescent civic sophistication that demands serious reconsideration of voting age restrictions.

A wave of neuroscience findings is reigniting the debate over voting age in Thailand. Researchers indicate that 16-year-olds can exhibit the cognitive maturity required for responsible electoral decision-making, challenging long-held assumptions about adolescent political competence. The evidence points to strong “cold cognition”—the ability to reason calmly and carefully—which aligns with the quiet, private act of voting. In parallel, Thailand has seen a surge in youth political activism, adding real-world relevance to the science and underscoring the need to reconsider youth civic engagement and electoral participation.

A recent Social Hackathon in Thailand brought together young people from across the country to practice synodality in a practical, collaborative setting. This initiative, inspired by the Catholic Church’s synodal approach, gives Thai youth a hands-on venue to brainstorm, solve problems, and build community—reflecting broader trends in civic participation and digital engagement among Southeast Asian youth.

Synodality centers on dialogue, shared discernment, and collective decision-making. Adapting these principles to a secular, youth-focused context, the event encourages teams to co-create solutions for real societal challenges. For Thai youth, who often have limited direct channels into civic processes, such platforms foster inclusion, agency, and leadership. Data from Thailand’s Ministry of Public Health and international partners highlight the need for youth involvement in shaping education and social policy, including digital literacy and community health initiatives.