This article examines the relationship between the phenomenon of aging and discourses on aging through the possibilities and limitations of typification as a methodological activity. The research question is based on the extent to which a particular discourse on aging can encompass the phenomenon of aging. By demonstrating the semantic gap between the triad of phenomenon-concept-discourse, the article addresses how discourses on aging that have been ideologically, politically, or scientifically constructed or reproduced can restrict the phenomenon of aging.

The article argues the phenomenon of aging to be multidimensional and able to appear differently from different perspectives. For example, while chronological aging can be viewed as a loss of functionality, it may also be interpreted as mastery in terms of social memory or as wisdom in a moral or religious context. This diversity shows aging to not only be a biological process but also a phenomenon that is manifested through social and cultural codes. Therefore, discourses on aging compress this phenomenon into specific meanings through type concepts.

While the article emphasizes how typification is necessary even for everyday language and important for making sense of the phenomenon of aging, it also warns against the possibility that typification limits the diversity of the phenomenon. The article argues typification to play an important role not only in scientific research but also in everyday linguistic practices. The phenomenon is conceptualized in everyday life through different typifications of aging that are shaped by socially accepted norms and values. The article also argues these typifications to often have an ideological and political background and therefore to perhaps be incomplete or inaccurate representations of the phenomenon of aging, with a similar structure applying to scientific discourses.

For example, the literature on gerontology often treats aging as a demographic issue, and the discourse attempts to explain aging only in numerical and measurable terms. However, aging is a process each individual experiences differently, and many of these experiences may not find a place in such discourses. In this case, the problem is related to the function of the typification mechanism as a methodological construction. A discourse represents a phenomenon by means of concepts. However, these representations are often incomplete, because concepts tend to have generalizing and simplifying properties. For example, while the process of aging can be associated with the concept of decrepitude, it can also be expressed by the concept of wisdom. This contrast shows how limited the discourses on aging can be.

The two main mediators of typification are temporality and individuality. This article emphasizes how aging can lead to temporally and individually different experiences, making the process of typification a challenging task. For example, in the context of temporality, aging can be viewed as both a physical and mental decline. However, this  discourse is only valid if one thinks of aging as the entry into the official age of retirement (e.g., at age 65). However, aging is a complex lifelong process. Individuality makes this process even more complex because each person experiences aging differently according to their own physical and mental capacities. Of course, discourses on mind-body dualism also come into play here. From a physicalist point of view, which reduces the individual to the body, aging means a physical collapse and, of course, a collapse of mental capacities. From an idealistic point of view, however, one can argue that the soul, mind, or consciousness matures with age relatively independently of what happens to the body.

 Aging is not just an individual process; it is also a social phenomenon. The article discusses how relations of power, wealth, and authority shape the aging process and how older people are socially positioned in this process. Modern societies often socially exclude the elderly due to their loss of productivity, resulting in a widespread phenomenon called agism. This is also a consequence of the importance capitalist societies place on productivity. Therefore, the real opposition is not between youth, which capitalism considers risky and vulnerable, and old age, which capitalism considers dysfunctional. Nevertheless, the elderly who are dysfunctional in terms of both consumption and production have the most disadvantaged position in these social dynamics compared to other age categories, and this situation is also manifested in the discourses on old age. A research practice that is indifferent to critical conceptual studies (regardless of the intentions of the researchers) risks reproducing this position of the elderly, even if it produces content that ostensibly contributes to social policies.

The article concludes with some examples of the discourses that have addressed the phenomenon of aging in different periods and cultures in order to test the issues and types listed. In this context, one example each from the mythological, philosophical, and scientific discourses will suffice. In ancient Greek mythology, aging is generally treated as a negative process and projection of social and political problems. The philosophical discourses of Plato and Cicero viewed aging as a process that brings wisdom and as something to be endured or praised. The scientific discourse of Aristotle, who personally viewed old age negatively, viewed it at best as a potential for moral wisdom, basing this on the distinction between epistemology and ethics.

These observations also reveal the dualism of age-friendly tradition and agist modernity in the literature to be meaningless. This article argues for a more critical and multidimensional approach to the phenomenon of aging, as this critical approach can improve the quality of studies on aging and help one better understand the social position of older people.