#1
The Strauss–Howe generational theory, created by authors William Strauss and Neil Howe, describes a theorized recurring generation cycle in American history. Strauss and Howe laid the groundwork for their theory in their 1991 book Generations, which discusses the history of the United States as a series of generational biographies going back to 1584.[1] In their 1997 book The Fourth Turning, the authors expanded the theory to focus on a fourfold cycle of generational types and recurring mood eras in American history.[2] They have since expanded on the concept in a variety of publications.

The theory was developed to describe the history of the United States, including the 13 colonies and their British antecedents, and this is where the most detailed research has been done.[original research?] However, the authors have also examined generational trends elsewhere in the world and described similar cycles in several developed countries.[3]

Full write up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generational_theory
#2
"Sounds interesting, I think I'll read-"

Quote by 33db

The theory was developed to describe the history of the United States


"lol nah"
#3
It is interesting because at face value it appears to work, by the way you misquoted me, I never said that it's from the wiki article.
I was surprised anyone posted to this, it isn't "trolly" enough and requires you to think of things you haven't already been told to think.
#5
Quote by TROUnation
I'd like to read it, but honestly I'm just too lazy.

That's honest.
#6
Quote by 33db
it isn't "trolly" enough and requires you to think of things you haven't already been told to think.

Haha
#8
This isn't the first time I've hared about this and I've read a little more than half of the book Generations before I realized it was dumb as fuck.

So in short history repeats it's self and were all doomed to fallow in a giant endless loop.

This whole thing is kinda dumb though the "theory" could be applied to anything.

This are going good, something major happens, things get bad, things get better.

IT can be applied to something as big as country or as small as a child's school life.
They can't stop us Let 'em try For heavy metal We will die!
#9
Is this the theory Steve Bannon believes in so he can create a WW3 and destroy all American institutions or something?


EDIT: https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/where-did-steve-bannon-get-his-worldview-from-my-book/2017/02/24/16937f38-f84a-11e6-9845-576c69081518_story.html

Oh yeah it is
Last edited by gonzaw at Feb 27, 2017,
#11
Quote by MurrcuryFoxx
So in short history repeats it's self and were all doomed to fallow in a giant endless loop.



This are going good, something major happens, things get bad, things get better.

Pretty much.
#12
Quote by gonzaw
Is this the theory Steve Bannon believes in so he can create a WW3 and destroy all American institutions or something?

I have to admit I find the Trump administration troubling, historically when economies collapse and nations go south there usually is war.
#13
Quote by gonzaw
Is this the theory Steve Bannon believes in so he can create a WW3 and destroy all American institutions or something?


EDIT: https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/where-did-steve-bannon-get-his-worldview-from-my-book/2017/02/24/16937f38-f84a-11e6-9845-576c69081518_story.html

Oh yeah it is

FFS don't look at it in such a small way, the theory wasn't developed for the likes of Bannon to fluff up his Ideology.
In many ways it offers up a positive, if you identify patterns you can then work towards preventing them, or if beneficial promoting them.

And don't take WAPO as a good source, Bezos owns it, therefore doubt is encouraged.
#14
You mean hypothesis. Right? Because a theory has the ability to predict the future and I doubt that there is any tengible evidence in here that can make accurate predictions.
#15
been listening to the audio book, and it's kind of disappointing. very repetitive without expanding much on the theory.

if these archetypes are a product of socializing factors, what happens when those factors change?

young adults are hitting life milestones at later and later ages: leaving home, joining the workforce, starting a family, etc.

people are living longer and are staying in the workforce and positions of power for longer.

what about globalization? thanks to the internet, people are socializing and being influenced by other people from around the globe who could be the same age but belong to a different generational archetype or not conform to any of the identified generational archetypes. do canadian millenials belong to the hero archetype as well? could they belong to the artist archetype instead (canada having its national crisis in 1995 with the quebec seperation referendum)? maybe canadians don't fit neatly into any of the proposed archetypes? how does this impact the social cues which would lead US millenials to adopt the hero archetype?
#16
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
You mean hypothesis. Right? Because a theory has the ability to predict the future and I doubt that there is any tengible evidence in here that can make accurate predictions.


is that really the distinction to make between hypothesis and theory? is a theory just a substantiated hypothesis? does it not make sense to talk of unsubstantiated theories? or is a hypothesis an example of something which a theory would predict assuming it was correct? that is, you develop a theory from which you can generate hypotheses which can be used to test the theory.
#17
Quote by 33db
FFS don't look at it in such a small way, the theory wasn't developed for the likes of Bannon to fluff up his Ideology.
In many ways it offers up a positive, if you identify patterns you can then work towards preventing them, or if beneficial promoting them.

And don't take WAPO as a good source, Bezos owns it, therefore doubt is encouraged.


What gave you that impression? The article I linked even had the original author state how Bannon kind of misinterpreted it. Can't fault the original authors for just presenting a theory of how the world works

Quote by Godsmack_IV
is that really the distinction to make between hypothesis and theory? is a theory just a substantiated hypothesis? does it not make sense to talk of unsubstantiated theories? or is a hypothesis an example of something which a theory would predict assuming it was correct? that is, you develop a theory from which you can generate hypotheses which can be used to test the theory.


I think informally it's fine to call such things "theories". A theory is basically a base model and fixed rules of how that model operates. In different areas and contexts it may have a more specialized meaning (like in logic or science). But informally, if you just define it like such, then IMO it's fine to call these theories, because that's what they do, they try to explain how a part of the world works but setting a base (of concepts, objects, people, etc) and then setting the rules that explain how all those work together.