Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Critique of the theory
#2
I see you mentioned astrology, so I might have some comments on that. But for now, I like that you made a video well-summarizing the generational theory. I'll have some comments as I listen. I'm enjoying your reasonable account. It's kind of a relief to our forum, actually Smile

First of all, I notice, like another poster here (unless that was also you, I forget), you called the great war after the glorious revolution as "King Phillip's War." Actually it was called King William's War (c.1689-1697). It was a great world war in Europe, fully deserving of the title of the "total war" of a 4T. Just as the Glorious Revolution was in Britain, so the great war that it triggered was mainly in Europe, because Louis XIV and his allies were hearing none of this so-called glorious revolution. And it was William of Orange who stepped up and waged a determined war to take power in England, protecting the advances in parliamentary rule established in the glorious revolution.

Of course, the ideas of "cusps" is astrological. I don't know if you recognized that. But I don't think "cusps" are mentioned anywhere else. But yes, I agree that is an oversight by S&H. Those born on the border are likely to be combos, or at least some of those born on the cusps go one way and some the other.

Steve Bannon has actually been pictured as Darth Vader on SNL.

The main regeneracy, in my opinion, will be seen as the left-reaction to Trump's election, currently on-going.

The main battle today is left vs. right, as you say, and I would point out that libertarian economics vs. social programs is the primary ideological battle. It is now expressed as the regeneracy vs. Trump and the GOP. Earlier it was Tea Party vs. Occupy Wall Street and Obamacare. In the 3T, of course, it was Clinton vs. the culture warriors who impeached him and the Gingrich contract. Globalism is not the nub of the issue, because it is not a left vs right issue.

I agree with you about cusps, and how you don't specifically date them. But since Generation X was not a cusp, I disagree with calling the X/millennial cusp as Gen Y (and this seems to have gone out of fashion; the Millennials now = Gen Y), and with calling the millie-homelander cusp as Gen Z. Maybe Bannon's label works, but Generation Z per se is equal to whatever we call the next artists. One letter per generation!

I don't think it's necessary to name the cusps, and I would limit them to two or three years on each side, not long enough to warrant separate archetypes (which you sort of admit). It seems like the 1924-era cusp people are NOT very "king-like," according to your description. The jokers seem to be the best artists; their prophet aspect sharpens them. The war babies also are marked by a Uranus-Neptune trine, which indicated more than usual creative vision. This also occurred at the previous prophet-nomad cusp around 1880, which made them more creative and visionary than today's Jonesers. That group were the main prophets of modernism, such as FDR, Einstein and Picasso.

You are at the very beginning of the nomad/hero cusp, so I would claim you were much more nomad than hero. The stats show the earlier nomads were more crime-prone than the "thief" cusp. You have a point that the earlier generation's influence is strong, but there's also the fact that the next generation begins just before the turning, so that late wavers and cuspers have less time in life to have the turning of their childhood impressed and stamped upon them. But in your third video, I see that your method makes some sense in moving generations back a few years.

I have never agreed with the anomaly, because it seemed to me they prolonged the Transcendental prophet generation far too long. It had more years than even the length of a medieval/renaissance generation during the 100+ year saecula of those times, while the other generations of the revolution/civil war times were shorter. I also never agreed with a 5-year fourth turning.

The political circle is valid, IMO, and many good questionnaires online are based on it. The way that we have an oppressive liberalism today, is that the real government today is corporate, and the corporate bosses are the authority that enslaves us. "Less government" has come to mean less restraint on the bosses.

My impression is the reverse of yours, as to when people say the recent 3T began, from my observation of this forum. Conservatives date the 4T from 2001, liberals from 2008. Conservatives date the 3T from 1980; liberals from 1984. The "facebook" forum appears to be secret and invisible.

Good work editing the wikipedia page!

Using astrology again, and Uranus-Neptune again (the two planets that correspond to the saeculum and its double rhythm), they made a conjunction around 1821, which could explain why people born around that time were more visionary and creative than would be typical of the nomad "gold rush" generation you have created. It was quite a powerful group. It just shows how astrology can inform cycles. Looking at Uranus and Neptune in connection with the saeculum is quite appropriate, considering the length of their cycles (Uranus = 84 years, Neptune 165), which is what I've been saying here since 1997, when both my book and The Fourth Turning were published on the same day. These two planets have a particular connection with modern (rather than renaissance/medieval/ancient) times because of their discovery only in modern times (Uranus 1781, Neptune 1846).

People here need to get past the compulsion to see astrology as false because it is not based on mechanical cause and effect. It's not, but mechanical cause and effect is also outdated in science. The universe today has been shown to be far-more astrological, since everything is connected (non-locality), and holographic (= the hermetic principle "as above, so below" on which astrology is based).

I basically agree with your revision of the dates. I don't know if I would completely adopt them; the alternative approach is to call the gilded and maybe the progressive as hybrid generations. I am pretty much in agreement with your civil war 4T dates. Of course, I've been saying this since I started on this forum in 1997. I have put the other turning dates just a bit later than you did.

Astrology cycles tend to confirm the S&H generation dates, even though they confirm the turning dates you have given. That's because the start of modern dominant generations (including the gilded as heroes) coincide with Neptune entering cardinal signs very closely. Including the GI generation in 1901, when Neptune entered Cancer. So:

Gilded 1822 = Neptune entered Capricorn 1821
Missionary 1960 = Neptune entering Aries in 1861 (on the day Ft. Sumpter was bombed)
GI 1901 = Neptune entering Cancer in 1901
Boomer 1943 = Neptune entering Libra 1943
Millennial 1982 = Neptune entering Capricorn 1984
Generation A 2025 = Neptune entering Aries 2025-26?

I think the generation cycle HAS proven its predictive value. The millennial generation has turned out very much as they predicted back when they were just "babies on board" in 1991. And the fact that we have apparently entered a fourth turning. It turns out that they had predicted 2005 as the start date for the 4T, and here on this forum and elsewhere I predicted the Fall of 2008 as the start time, with a great economic crash. That is what happened, and although the start date is still controversial, Mr. Howe has adopted the date I had predicted. I also predicted here and elsewhere that the US would go to war in the Summer of 2001 (9-11).

See my videos:
https://youtu.be/oKmyB1q3H68
https://youtu.be/WAoeW5fXJYU

Good work, and I think you have improved on the theory.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Critique of the theory - by Drakus79 - 03-27-2017, 11:39 PM
RE: Critique of the theory - by Eric the Green - 03-28-2017, 01:11 AM
RE: Critique of the theory - by beechnut79 - 03-28-2017, 11:42 AM
RE: Critique of the theory - by Eric the Green - 03-28-2017, 03:30 PM
RE: Critique of the theory - by Drakus79 - 03-28-2017, 06:07 PM
RE: Critique of the theory - by TnT - 03-29-2017, 06:09 PM
RE: Critique of the theory - by Ragnarök_62 - 03-29-2017, 08:10 PM
RE: Critique of the theory - by David Horn - 03-30-2017, 10:38 AM
RE: Critique of the theory - by The Wonkette - 03-30-2017, 11:10 AM
RE: Critique of the theory - by David Horn - 03-30-2017, 12:47 PM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Theory: the 'turnings' are caused by generationally oscillating hormone levels Ldr 0 1,417 01-20-2020, 01:37 PM
Last Post: Ldr
  My "Hybrid Turning" Theory Anthony '58 21 16,643 09-03-2018, 07:54 PM
Last Post: Hintergrund
  Fourth Turning Theory with a Fibonacci Overlay TeacherinExile 1 7,416 03-04-2017, 07:52 PM
Last Post: Eric the Green

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)