Quarantine Shaming and Emergence of Groupthink

[pbrower2a]

I expect people to react to the quarantine exactly as their generational types suggest that they would. I expect Boomers to use it for a renewed voyage to the Interior for the lack of anything better to do, X to turn to their entrepreneurial tendencies to offer entrepreneurial solutions, and Millennial adults to establish new mass norms.

[Eric the Green]

(03-21-2020, 01:40 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(03-21-2020, 07:06 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: What Nomad is calling Groupthink corresponds to the unity of the Profit, Nomad & Hero after the Trigger, Regeneracy and into the heart of the crisis.  This is a major feature of S&H.  It occurs every Crisis.  It refines the new values which are enforced in the coming high.  Basically, the ideals at the heart of the crisis are accepted by most and made part of the culture.

The virus is more and more looking like the Trigger for this time around.  A little late - the Prophets are getting too old to run for president, and about to cede control - but not never.  The primary trial and error will be performed by the medical community, but it looks like we will all play parts, and the urgency is apt to spread to other issues.

If so, the virus is illustrating the idea that politics must acknowledge science, that one cannot create lies and fantasy perspectives that have nothing to do with reality.  It is unexpected, but is shaped to illustrate and force acceptance of a key part of the progressive worldview.

Nomad is abandoning S&H language, making up his own, to try to create his own lies and fantasy, to attempt to deny the cycles.

I am personally hoping the quarantine will last less long than the four years it traditionally takes to fight a Crisis war.  The military usually has to spend time mobilizing, learning how to most effectively use the weapons of the time, and eventually push the fronts.  It will probably take the medical community less time, but the new unity will likely spread to global warming and other issues stalled by conservative ideology (or Groupthink) to ignore problems and not take action.

I personally think we ought to stick with S&H language and theory and not go with Nomad’s alternate.

The "unity" seen for the first time right now IS the beginning of Regeneracy - to which I am of course not opposed.

This "unity" must overcome the paradigm of the Prophet.  He is not involved because he wants to be, it is of necessity only.  And in youth, the Prophet does not conform, generally, to such a paradigm shift except on his own terms.  It is never about unification.

What we are seeing now is the beginning (NOT THE FULFILLMENT) of the Groupthink that will bring stale culture.  To which the next Prophet will rebel against in the next Awakening.

Please agree:

when Individualism is strong, OUTWARD regeneracy is weak.
When Collectivism is strong, INNER regeneracy is weak.

When you understand the above concept, we can begin to understand each other.  We are not here talking in our own terms and phrases since we are in the Generational Cycles forum concerning the ideology (NOT VALUES) of Strauss and Howe.

Values =/= Ideology
Ideology = / = Values

There's an incredibly stark difference.

Anyone who leads first with Values in the coming Regeneracy will be utterly shunned and left out.  You will be seen as part of the problem, not as part of the solution.

Not every human being has values.  Every human has ideology even if they know it or do not know it.  Not every human without values is IMMORAL either.  What the Regeneracy generation will come to be defined as (as has been previously) is a generation that sets aside all values in order to accomplish great things OUTWARDLY.  That is why they feel inwardly dead once all the accomplishment has been done.

Thus, usher in the next Prophet to revive in the opposite direction.

Yin and Yang are not values-driven.  They just are.  The ebb and flow of the wave accuses no one and has no righteous indignation.  It is a force of nature.  Prophet is not Yin/Yang oriented.  Prophet is an archetype of very inwardly-driven CAUSE.

That CAUSE-mentality has almost destroyed America.  Thank the gods I now know it won't destroy us, but only turn another corner in our history.

Some good thoughts from you both. From my more mystic perspective, which is not as respected in a 4T or a 1T, but which I cannot forget as a typical prophet, there was a lot of common ground among the idealistic prophets in the early to mid Awakening era. The new paradigm said that peace and ecology were necessary ideals and saving the planet a worthy goal, and that diversity was to be respected. It lifted mind above matter and mechanism (contrary to lds, is that his name) and elevated experience of higher consciousness and spirit as determining factors in life and society, and offered the chance of heightened sensitivity and love. As the later Awakening developed and Reaganomics was foisted upon the people by the corporate elite that resisted ecological and consumer reforms, individualism prevailed. The "do your own thing" motto which meant to unfold one's natural self expression which would naturally harmonize with others because it was authentic and inspired, was brought down to "looking out for #1" which was about avoiding taxes and regulations and giving carte blanche to greed as "good." 

The Awakening created new values, the green values. The purpose of the 4T is to enact these values and make them the basis for new institutions and a new consensus after defeating the resistance to them. 4Ts are not about unity and have never been so. It is a battle, and prophets lead the way. Compromise fails. There is no substitute for victory. It is not having a point of view that is wrong; what is wrong is letting the wrong view win. The right view must win; there's no way around it. The battle lines are drawn and all generations are drawn in.

I do elevate values as of higher "value" over ideology. It is ideology that has crippled us, specifically the right-wing ideologies. I would say values ARE morality. The good is a value, and the good is what morality is. Prophets are driven by a spiritual awakening. We prophets are indeed driven by causes, and that can get in the way, I admit, of peaceful cooperation and compromise, but it's also essential for the regeneracy to have a prophet leader who can combine dedication to realizing the values of the Awakening with a nomad-like dedication to doing whatever is necessary to meet the crisis. Perhaps another Obama-cohort leader like Mitch Landrieu may emerge to provide this combo, as did FDR and Lincoln.

The regeneracy started in 2017-18 with the resistance to Trump, the mobilization for gun control, the climate marches and the movement that elected a Democratic congress. If things go well, which is not at all clear, that regeneracy will put Joe Biden in the White House for a while. He is not a great prophet leader though, so that prospect still awaits us. But he might well lead society back onto a reasonably valuable path, and the regeneracy will continue because his leadership will not be enough to meet the needs which this regeneracy addresses.

The virus crisis is a momentary event that has some chance of moving us toward more collective action. That is necessary in a 4T. That does not mean unity, since two or more collectives are at war during a 4T, especially one that resembles the civil war crisis as ours does. Individualism fades away in a 4T. I mostly agree with:

when Individualism is strong, OUTWARD regeneracy is weak.

When Collectivism is strong, INNER regeneracy is weak.

However, I think there are not two whole turnings of one and then the other. In a 1T collectivism is strong but individualism is beginning among some. In a 2T individualism is rising but collectivism remains strong for a while and starts to decline. In a 3T individualism is strong but some people see that we need more collectivism. In a 4T collectivism is rising and some individualism is left over for a while.

The essence of this crisis remains the issues Bernie Sanders defined. He is the gray champion who may not be president, but is defining what needs to regenerate. The climate crisis, the inequality crisis, the health care crisis (which the virus crisis may heighten), the threat to democracy, too much nationalism, racism and militarism, these and more must be resolved to a degree so that progress can start again and continue instead of decline. Expect this 4T to continue to 2028-29.

[TheNomad]

Eric I can identify with the idea Prophets in youth changed a lot of things in terms of becoming aware "we have to look at the planet and ecology and we can't just be numb servants to the grind."

The whole hippie thing was peace and love and don't kill mother earth.

WHY, then, after all this time - if the Prophet was so united in this (which I can accept that!) - why has more shitting on the planet happened on their watch than ever before (exclude the idea of a more industrialized world)?

All of the things you touch on about the values, but it seemed to me the Prophet also then became the carpetbagger and went back on their vision of green things and empty space and room to take a wild uninterrupted trip. Rhett mentioned they "sold out". They, themselves, became what they hated in corporate overmongers. They ultimately come chose the expensive private jet without caring the emissions.

How did this happen? I think it happened because they just can't agree on anything. And I thin the cause of that is because they lead too hard with their values. Prophet has built homes of their values and are guarding it with their life. Claimed land and made structures and drawn battle lines which cannot be crossed. They took possession of the land and saw themselves, the enemy, on the other side of the field. In war, who can legislate? There is a values war in Prophet that has always been there.

How, if it began as a united front to resolve those issues, how after all this time and they are at MORE THAN PEAK occupancy of power, how is THIS the hardest time to get anything accomplished?

Ppl need to take responsibility. Ppl just cannot understand a united world not juiced in values but actually based in pragmatic problem-solving.

Eric, can you talk a little bit about what, if at all, you think is the difference between values and pragmatism?

[Eric the Green]

(03-23-2020, 04:17 AM)TheNomad Wrote: Eric I can identify with the idea Prophets in youth changed a lot of things in terms of becoming aware "we have to look at the planet and ecology and we can't just be numb servants to the grind."

The whole hippie thing was peace and love and don't kill mother earth.

WHY, then, after all this time - if the Prophet was so united in this (which I can accept that!) - why has more shitting on the planet happened on their watch than ever before (exclude the idea of a more industrialized world)?  

All of the things you touch on about the values, but it seemed to me the Prophet also then became the carpetbagger and went back on their vision of green things and empty space and room to take a wild uninterrupted trip.  Rhett mentioned they "sold out".  They, themselves, became what they hated in corporate overmongers.  They ultimately come chose the expensive private jet without caring the emissions.

How did this happen?  I think it happened because they just can't agree on anything.  And I think the cause of that is because they lead too hard with their values.  Prophet has built homes of their values and are guarding it with their life.  Claimed land and made structures and drawn battle lines which cannot be crossed.  They took possession of the land and saw themselves, the enemy, on the other side of the field.  In war, who can legislate?  There is a values war in Prophet that has always been there.

How, if it began as a united front to resolve those issues, how after all this time and they are at MORE THAN PEAK occupancy of power, how is THIS the hardest time to get anything accomplished?

Ppl need to take responsibility.  Ppl just cannot understand a united world not juiced in values but actually based in pragmatic problem-solving.

Eric, can you talk a little bit about what, if at all, you think is the difference between values and pragmatism?

Pretty good reply

I don't think shitting on the planet happened under their watch alone. Policies at any time are enacted by several generations. Reagan was a GI/Greatest generation guy as were some of his cohorts in his administration. Climate change really ramped up once he took over. Previous generations did establish a dirty industry, and only silents and boomers in circa 1970 made sure that pollution laws and regulatory agencies were set up to clean things up. GIs lent their support too. And industry did get cleaner. Earlier generations had acted to make them more fair. But the hippies also became yuppies, and since then they have increasingly forgotten their earlier unity and dedication to ideals. Boomer idealism was not sustained enough. Many kept their hopes and dreams alive, but many did just as you say. Meanwhile Boomers led the way into the information age.

Older people typically sell out, but why did they sell out? Maybe because the opposite of what you say; the new values and inspiration and dedication to causes did not sink deeply enough into them. The USA is inherently a materialistic and commercial culture, and few are immune to it. The Reaganomics scam was very appealing. To a generation that loved to live free, an assault on government as the problem was tempting. It was tempting to all generations. Who likes the government? Also, on the other hand, traditional religion has a huge influence in America. The fundamentalist craze became a prophet obsession, although led by silents too. And Gen X did nothing to break away from these trends but joined them in even greater numbers. If the right-wing side sees itself as the only word of God, it makes compromise difficult.

I disagree that the battle lines are itself the problem, as you know. The problem is that the wrong side has too much power, and is too monolithic and stubborn. The only thing for more moderate and liberal people to do in the face of this horrible threat is to coalesce and become increasingly stubborn in turn. And being prophets dedicated to causes in youth, this came somewhat naturally to some on the liberal side. But participation in this stalemate is multigenerational; Gen Xers have a lot of power now and Silents did earlier on. Millennials offer hope not so much for more spiritual inspiration, but they support much of the Awakening values in their policies, and could break the stalemate if they get involved and on board with the fight instead of whining about boomers.

Values and pragmatism need each other to be effective. A value means nothing if not put into practice. To do this it must meet reality. The values must remain to guide actions, or else the goal gets lost amid cynicism and lack of direction. A higher spiritual realization is a basis for manifesting ideal realities, but it takes practice and strong realization to be sustained.

[Bob Butler 54]

I would also note values can change.  What a young hippie growing up in a badly flawed world might describe it as selling out. The same person might call it something else when many of the problems have been addressed and he has a wife and kids.  It might be called becoming more mature.  That is the difference between packing an extra set of bell bottoms into your back pack and setting off to the Summer of Love and holding down a job that keeps your loved ones eating.

A private jet might seem pragmatic if you are elite with resources out the yin-yang, but feel quite different to the bulk of us.

A guy who has lived in a sparsely populated area where things are slow might perceive different a different world and set goals form an urbanite.

If you don’t account for things like this, if you lump people together arbitrarily, the result could look like a mess.  Heck, even if you are aware of them, it is still a mess.

Groups in a coherent system should share similar ways of looking at things, and similar goals.  If you lump together generations or ages or archetypes that do not make sense, you get confused.

[TheNomad]

I hear you saying one side has the power and is immovable.

For myself, I view one side as completely resistant to any progress. They only want things to not change. That's how I see it. The other side wants change. They want progress. I won't and cannot make an argument for the side that wants no progress. I can't.

However, it then often becomes the idea "those people don't matter". That 50% of America does not matter. 50% of Americans are wrong and should not be voting because they vote wrongly and their values are wrong.

Only of late, I cannot justify that argument. As much as I despise the president and cannot fathom 50% of Americans wanted that and in a normal non-virus poll still do, I no longer can accept THAT VIEW as correct. I was wrong. I did not turncoat and evangelize. I didn't get Born Again and then subscribe to Repeal Obamacare.

I came to the conclusion that no side is wrong. It cannot be viewed through that lens anymore.

I can't provide the answer, except to say I am seeing the answer unfolding so I have to roll with it. Ppl younger than I am, they don't care what anyone believes, professes or "knows to be right".

What I see are ppl coming on the scene that have had enough with 2 sides. Nomads know it almost inherently. I keep saying it but in the future, anyone who chooses to lead with values will be locked out of the process. The younger ppl will not have the patience for it. They will identify the problems and they WILL solve them uniformly and without questions. The type of haggling we have seen between senior members of old guard will be seen as a thing not unlike the Berlin Wall - as in "we can't believe that ever happened".

THAT'S WHAT I SEE. That's not what I even personally believe or want. I personally would see flushed red napkins disappearing and replaced with blue ones... and victory abound? I JUST DON'T THINK THAT COULD EVEN HAPPEN. However, I do think we shall expect radical progression in the future as was obviously seen in the last 4T... commanded by rather blue individuals. However, I see for sure a NEW RED that is way more open to pragmatism not tied to values. Where the "aisle" is exploded and ppl ride under the banner of a color but in truth are just rather purple and enjoy working to get things done instead of serving either religious or social justice.

There is too much crusading and everyone of that certain age does it. I'm not going to point fingers, but in the democratic debates, I saw way many elder folks trying to shout down other elder folks to appear MUCH LIKE the loud-mouthed preachers in that old TBN channel (still exists?) and the fat guy who shouts and commands "amen". It's become all the same to me. Crusading and yelping is what Prophet is made of. On both sides. And if they aren't, themselves, shouting and crusading, they are hanging out under the banner of someone who is.

When someone here said Bernie Sanders was not values driven, they needed to be reprimanded. There is a "warning level" here, that person should have received points. Compared to Sanders, Biden is Grandpa with a bedtime story. Men even 20 years his junior and not with heart issues are more reserved and not trying to climb mt Everest of world politics.

Anyone that age should be settling down not ramping up. How can America get behind anyone that old as their strong leader?

[TheNomad]

(03-23-2020, 05:43 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I would also note values can change.  What a young hippie growing up in a badly flawed world might describe it as selling out.  The same person might call it something else when many of the problems have been addressed and he has a wife and kids.  It might be called becoming more mature.  That is the difference between packing an extra set of bell bottoms into your back pack and setting off to the Summer of Love and holding down a job that keeps your loved ones eating.

A private jet might seem pragmatic if you are elite with resources out the yin-yang, but feel quite different to the bulk of us.

A guy who has lived in a sparsely populated area where things are slow might perceive different a different world and set goals form an urbanite.

If you don’t account for things like this, if you lump people together arbitrarily, the result could look like a mess.  Heck, even if you are aware of them, it is still a mess.

Groups in a coherent system should share similar ways of looking at things, and similar goals.  If you lump together generations or ages or archetypes that do not make sense, you get confused.

The "work" anyone is doing HERE - in this particular forum of interaction - is 100% about "lumping together" and "generalizing". 

Archetypes are not about individuals or exceptions.  The study of archetypes is about WHAT IS IT AS A WHOLE.  Every single person who exists is different.  Some Prophet persons are more like Hero or opposite.

Generalization is what this is about.  100%

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-23-2020, 05:59 AM)TheNomad Wrote: The "work" anyone is doing HERE - in this particular forum of interaction - is 100% about "lumping together" and "generalizing". 

But it does help if the generalizations make some sort of sense.

[TheNomad]

(03-23-2020, 06:03 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(03-23-2020, 05:59 AM)TheNomad Wrote: The "work" anyone is doing HERE - in this particular forum of interaction - is 100% about "lumping together" and "generalizing". 

But it does help if the generalizations make some sort of sense.

Not everything "makes sense" to everyone, but I think you say a misnomer, you should be writing "it doesn't make sense TO ME".  There's a big difference.  Not even "I don't agree" but that you say it doesn't make sense, you're leaving out a big factor which is your perception of someone else's "narration".  We are all telling ourselves various versions of this "story".  So many things are not known or understood.

I would say there's a primary motivator here how EVERYONE is perceiving this, most are through the lens of fear.  I was always taught anything that comes by way of fear should be examined what what it is... an untruth.  There is nothing true or right that comes from fear.  Except maybe the primal urges of fight and flight which modern humans have all but left behind for reason.  Now is no different. Reason over fear.  Since we do not have enough information for a totally reason-based action, we are all collectively really succumbing to fear-based responses.

[Bob Butler 54]

No, I mean it does not make sense. You are attributing your ideas to S&H when they are your ideas. If you acknowledged them as original, I would not be on your case as much. As is, you have the basics of S&H ever so wrong. I have interacted with many folk on many sites. We had one guy who interpreted the Bible as supporting prejudice. Others believe gun prohibition will work, will not bring with it the usual problems of prohibition. But I have not generally been the S&H police, defending their work and ideas from heresy.

I for one am not reacting out of fear, nor are those whom I am interacting with. It is more courage laced with sensible precaution that I have encountered. I’m the INTP, trying to come up with a theory. I use S&H as one basis out of many, but am not shy of saying what is original and letting it stand of its own merits.

But some are still acting out of self interest, the heck with everyone else. That in its extreme is the Unraveling attitude. Some people are clinging to it, refusing to see the need.

[TheNomad]

(03-23-2020, 05:50 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: No, I mean it does not make sense.  You are attributing your ideas to S&H when they are your ideas.  If you acknowledged them as original, I would not be on your case as much.  As is, you have the basics of S&H ever so wrong.  I have interacted with many folk on many sites.  We had one guy who interpreted the Bible as supporting prejudice.  Others believe gun prohibition will work, will not bring with it the usual problems of prohibition.  But I have not generally been the S&H police, defending their work and ideas from heresy.

I for one am not reacting out of fear, nor are those whom I am interacting with.  It is more courage laced with sensible precaution that I have encountered.  I’m the INTP, trying to come up with a theory.  I use S&H as one basis out of many, but am not shy of saying what is original and letting it stand of its own merits.

But some are still acting out of self interest, the heck with everyone else.  That in its extreme is the Unraveling attitude.  Some people are clinging to it, refusing to see the need.

You've read a lot (or at least responded to) what I've written in this forum.  You would say I don't understand the Strauss Howe concepts?  Like, not in a smarmy way, you sense academically I don't understand the material?

[TheNomad]

There isn't much you said, Rhett, that I don't think to be in line with the concepts we are here to discuss. I don't like the words "I agree with you" because I'm just not into throwing my voice at agreement or disagreement.

What I questioned in what you said:

Quote:One thing to expect is an attempt to carve the values of this Crisis into stone. In the three prior American Crises we had the Constitution written, the post Civil War amendments guaranteeing the blacks rights passed, and the creation of the UN.

All three attempts at carving into stone resulted in a cracked rock. The Constitution for all it’s slave compromises failed. The country fell apart into civil war. The blacks ran into Jim Crow. The UN with its security council veto could not handle the Cold War. All three attempts to some degree were frustrated.

Crisis eras and the High that comes after is about renewal and I would say those at the time believe they are trying to write in stone... but for real, it's just advancement. Knowing the book concepts, I don't look for stone writing but major accomplishments. The American Constitution failed? That's a bit much. It did the best it could at that time to lay a groundwork for future "renovations" of slaves from chatle to humans. Harsh language but true. Designation for slaves as "1/3" the value of a normal human might have been a startling concept for then. Do we think a slave owner truly regarded his property as human AT ALL? How could they? How could anyone regard a slave as human while simultaneously owning them?

New advancements came with each High and renewal. I view America as a thing always looking to the future and renovating ideas and laws to make way for those advancements while knowing they can't be done in the present. "City On A Hill" is metaphoric, it's viewed from a distance, a place to strive toward, it may not be YET for the pilgrim, but they can see it on the horizon.

And now, today, so many years later, we still have inherent discrimination and systemic hate. But no one in 2020 is relegated to being property, everyone is equal at least in theory, and as time passes, equality grows.

I only addressed one example of this. But I sense it could be applied to so many things American.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-23-2020, 05:58 PM)TheNomad Wrote: You've read a lot (or at least responded to) what I've written in this forum.  You would say I don't understand the Strauss Howe concepts?  Like, not in a smarmy way, you sense academically I don't understand the material?

Correct.  Notably you have a bad opinion of the Boomers, the latest Prophets, while S&H were enthusiastic about the Prophet - Nomad - Hero configuration of the Crisis.  Also you seem to think something positive will come when the Boomers phase out, but the Nomad -  Hero - Artist configuration of the High is portrayed by S&H as a lockdown, passive, don’t change the culture turning with infrastructure building.

Now I could agree with some of that.  The blue boomers did see most of the flaws they yelled about fixed in the Awakening.  The red boomers were very different, tried to roll back things, but were generally blocked from doing so.  The net effect was stalemate, that little would happen when the Boomers were around.  This is not optimal, but it is not S&H either.  Well, they did say that Unravellings are supposed to be about compromise, two sides putting conflict off and lots of across the aisle fighting.  We certainly did enough of that the last several decades.

And with nukes making the Crisis War obsolete and more being done with the legislature, I was starting to anticipate that there would be no Trigger or Regeneracy during this Crisis configuration.  Thus, the transformation was apt to come later, say in the Awakening, same as in the 1960s.  So the idea of a late transformation was one I was wide open to.

But if you assume the Coronavirus is the trigger, that goes away.  That would put us much more back in line with the Industrial Age S&H pattern.  We look to be heading towards a transformational Crisis, and a stagnant High, more what S&H predicted.

So you are handing out pitch forks and halos where S&H were more into just halos.  I will grumble about the red Boomers all you like.  I just don’t expect much of the High configuration.  You would have to define them better and suggest what they are going to do other than poof magic make all the problems go away.  If you don’t come up with something good, I would anticipate the S&H lockdown with infrastructure building.

[pbrower2a]

One good thing -- it's making the vocal tirade about politics less likely. If someone says something nasty I can tell the person that his speech may contain CORVID-19 without the person knowing about it.

[TheNomad]

I did not sense the material portrayed any archetype as positive or negative, good or bad.. they seemed rather ambivalent and academic.

My opinions about the Prophet archetype (or whatever it is you are saying) is from me. I mean, from me while being influenced by the concepts in the books. Like I said, I never sensed the authors were empassioned about anything except in The 4th Turning, they billed it as "prophecy" and maintained a rather strong push that something Dark was coming. The 4th Turning was written in the 90s.

If you ever listened to the audiobook version of 4th Turning (forward narrated by the actual authors) they still seem highly academic and don't really take any passioned stance except at certain moments. You can actually hear their inflections.

Even still, I wouldn't expect "passion" to play any role in science. You seem to pose science as the equalizer, but science is by nature devoid of any passion or values, it simply makes suppositions and hypotheses.

I think I have a really good understanding of the basics of the framework. How the cycles work, which follows what, how the archetypes fit in and how they are shaped by the Turnings, by how they were raised, and by how their parents raised them and how THEIR parents were raised before. It seems to be all about that.

Yes, I do think once Prophet diminishes and the values-based approach is abandoned we will see worker ants almost possessed by a spirit of Solving instead of bickering. That's my opinion, but it's also laid out in the framework.

High and restructuring happens when Prophet is passing on. I don't think that's a mistake or coincidence. Priority goes to solutions rather than values. Some say they are not mutually exclusive, but if we are dealing with Turnings. Why are the problems getting solved when the Prophet archetype transitions from the deathbed to the crib? I mean, I didn't create that swing, it's from the authors. They made this format.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-23-2020, 07:41 PM)TheNomad Wrote: Yes, I do think once Prophet diminishes and the values-based approach is abandoned we will see worker ants almost possessed by a spirit of Solving instead of bickering.  That's my opinion, but it's also laid out in the framework.

High and restructuring happens when Prophet is passing on.  I don't think that's a mistake or coincidence.  Priority goes to solutions rather than values.  Some say they are not mutually exclusive, but if we are dealing with Turnings.  Why are the problems getting solved when the Prophet archetype transitions from the deathbed to the crib?  I mean, I didn't create that swing, it's from the authors.  They made this format.

My view is that the debate (across the aisle as you put it) occurs during the Unravelling and early Crisis.  Not overly productive.  Say bad things about this phase if you like.  Then the Trigger and Regeneracy begins a time when you change from debating the issues to actually solving the problems.  In the Industrial Age the surrender of the bad guys ends this phase.  The Constitution, the post Civil War Amendments, the UN Charter are typical of setting the solutions in place hopefully permanently.  In practice, these things do not work as well as hoped.  Then you get the High, which is stagnant and boring (with infrastructure building.)

Thus, the Prophet - Nomad - Hero configuration is key to learning and first implementing the new values.  By the time the High and the Nomad - Hero - Artist combination is there, the Crisis is well over and the values are in place.

Thus, your ideology delays things arbitrarily, is distinct from S&H, and has no evidence of occurring in the real world. You attack the problem and stop talking about it with the Trigger and Regeneracy, not when the Prophets age out.

[Eric the Green]

(03-23-2020, 07:41 PM)TheNomad Wrote: I
I think I have a really good understanding of the basics of the framework.  How the cycles work, which follows what, how the archetypes fit in and how they are shaped by the Turnings, by how they were raised, and by how their parents raised them and how THEIR parents were raised before.  It seems to be all about that.

Yes, I do think once Prophet diminishes and the values-based approach is abandoned we will see worker ants almost possessed by a spirit of Solving instead of bickering.  That's my opinion, but it's also laid out in the framework.

High and restructuring happens when Prophet is passing on.  I don't think that's a mistake or coincidence.  Priority goes to solutions rather than values.  Some say they are not mutually exclusive, but if we are dealing with Turnings.  Why are the problems getting solved when the Prophet archetype transitions from the deathbed to the crib?  I mean, I didn't create that swing, it's from the authors.  They made this format.

Although you have a good understanding of the framework, the role of the prophet was not supposed to be as you say. Maybe the boomers have not lived up to their role, so today's nomads such as yourself don't think they can do it. But S&H clearly said the prophets are elder leaders in the 4th turning crisis, not that they simply die or get out of the way. Without prophets the crisis is not met. It is definitely a time of drastic action, and possible great war, which happens because prophets are at the helm, with nomads providing management skills and heroes providing the shock troops. Restructuring happens in the fourth turning. 

We are nowhere near a High; the battle has not even been joined. You got that thoroughly mixed up. We are in the 4th turning. We are 1850s redux. The battle is on the horizon between red and blue. That's where we are. The way out is the way through. We must face the crisis and join the battle against the reds. The crisis is not solved by a lack of values, causes not fought for and decisions not being made. The Revolutionaries pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to their cause. Lincoln called his prophetic cause something to dedicate our lives and our last full measure of devotion to. Churchill and FDR called World War II the glorious cause. Nothing has been dealt with yet that has caused this crisis. A huge agenda remains. Only when THEY, the red tribe (of all generations) are defeated, can we move into a calmer period of recovery and "high" when the prophets will pass on and nomads will be the grouchy elder leaders saying the buck stops here and get off my lawn. I hope we can do it without war and through persuasion and law in this new age, although the 4T track record is not good and our current adversaries are dug in.

The 1T high is a time when new building continues that is based on the restructuring and great changes and decisions made by prophet leaders, nomad managers and hero soldiers and workers during the 4T. Those 4T changes and decisions will happen through the next decade. The 1T you confuse our current time with will not begin until 2029.

[pbrower2a]

(03-23-2020, 07:41 PM)TheNomad Wrote: I did not sense the material portrayed any archetype as positive or negative, good or bad.. they seemed rather ambivalent and academic.

Just imagine people predicting in 1909 that the age-old Hohenzollern, Hapsburg, and Romanov dynasties would collapse at the end of what would be the worst war since antiquity, that the cultural consensus of the Victorian Era would implode, that chemistry and the newfangled aeroplanes and horseless carriages would make warfare even deadlier, and that youth born in the latter part of the nineteenth century would become to a large extent the most cynical and callous people who ever lived. Imagine an upheaval in Russia that brings about one of the most brutal tyrannies ever known.The world licks its wounds from the war and even (in most places) gets new and benign governments -- but the era of Thomas Masaryk collapses with the market economy in 1929 to bring to the world the closest thing to an Antichrist that has existed since the time of Nero.  If you were to predict the deeds of that Antichrist to include the Holocaust, then people of 1909 would have asserted that such things are impossible because people do not do such things anymore. 

The future can be an absurdity, but it happens nonetheless.    

Quote:My opinions about the Prophet archetype (or whatever it is you are saying) is from me.  I mean, from me while being influenced by the concepts in the books.  Like I said, I never sensed the authors were empassioned about anything except in The 4th Turning, they billed it as "prophecy" and maintained a rather strong push that something Dark was coming.  The 4th Turning was written in the 90s.

The last Crisis includes some of the most obscene tales of inhuman history ever. Anyone who told us to expect much the same around 2020  would be ridiculed as a hysterical alarmist. Howe and Strauss reminded us of something else: that the biggest difference between the Crisis of 1940 and the Crisis of 2020 was that the atom bomb came into existence only toward the end of the Crisis of 1940, and that if only one country could build an atomic bomb before 1945, practically any country with the GDP of the state of New Mexico can build or buy one now. 
 

Quote:If you ever listened to the audiobook version of 4th Turning (forward narrated by the actual authors) they still seem highly academic and don't really take any passioned stance except at certain moments.  You can actually hear their inflections.

That is the safest way to make predictions of the future: to make them without passion. Making predictions of the future with great passion? That's for religious hucksters who take Revelation too seriously. Seven trumpets, seven seals, Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse...

(Were I God I would have inflicted plagues upon Germany like those against the Egyptians, and deputized a Messiah at the time of Kristallnacht ... and if Hitler did not get the message I would have transmuted some lead object into U-235 and detonated it).

Quote:Even still, I wouldn't expect "passion" to play any role in science.  You seem to pose science as the equalizer, but science is by nature devoid of any passion or values, it simply makes suppositions and hypotheses.  

Histrionics and science do not go well together. People use science to achieve their ends. 
 

Quote:I think I have a really good understanding of the basics of the framework.  How the cycles work, which follows what, how the archetypes fit in and how they are shaped by the Turnings, by how they were raised, and by how their parents raised them and how THEIR parents were raised before.  It seems to be all about that.

As I understand it, adults may see themselves as offering the obvious way in which to raise children, often to give children what they lacked. So why do those parents' children not turn out like them? Because those young parents will not expose their children to the deficiencies of life that those adults experienced as children! The GI Generation raised Boomers, to the extent possible, in a world of material comfort and certainty that GI children lacked in hardscrabble childhoods. In contrast, Boom parents had little problem (in many cases) accepting as a norm that children  would have to shoulder responsibilities of debt early so that their X and Millennial children would work harder and longer for less so that there would be more wealth under the command of investors. 

Quote:Yes, I do think once Prophet diminishes and the values-based approach is abandoned we will see worker ants almost possessed by a spirit of Solving instead of bickering.  That's my opinion, but it's also laid out in the framework.

Maybe -- but the 'unnecessary bickering' becomes necessary again as the world becomes a soulless machine that demands complacent obedience and conformity. As the Awakening approaches, kids who never knew the Crisis first-hand start to ask inconvenient questions. 

Quote:High and restructuring happens when Prophet is passing on.  I don't think that's a mistake or coincidence.  Priority goes to solutions rather than values.  Some say they are not mutually exclusive, but if we are dealing with Turnings.  Why are the problems getting solved when the Prophet archetype transitions from the deathbed to the crib?  I mean, I didn't create that swing, it's from the authors.  They made this format.

No solution is perfect. Mindless consumerism was the lubricant of the High, in which time people believed a smooth-talking second-tier actor who pitched "Progress is Our Most Important Product". Mindless consumerism was the definitive expression of conformity, even if it implied chain-smoking (progress, of course, to an early death from cancer, emphysema, or heart failure. Few people knew that at the time, and the comparative few who did knew enough to keep their mouths shut. Mindless conservatism also kept people from questioning the validity of colonialism (colonies were great places for selling wares to captive markets) or neo-colonialism (likewise) and of course to defend against the Communist menace. 

Deficiency of a virtue leads to people getting that virtue, and eventually that virtue becomes a perverse parody of itself in glut. In the end people question the merit of that virtue as people who created it off go off to the nursing home or the grave -- and we again have a glut. That is a big part of the cycle.

[TheNomad]

(03-23-2020, 10:12 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: We are nowhere near a High; the battle has not even been joined.

I've said, I think yall may not or I'm not saying something properly.. that I'm speaking in advance.  The High is supposed to begin in about 8 years.  By that time, Prophet will be 64-82yo.  That's just about expiration time for the top end.  And to consider, 64 is our retirement age range, those people are passing out of "relative influence" based on that alone.  Isn't that what we are really talking about here?

I would even adjust that for the sake of ppl live longer lives in our times.  In my head, that will prolong the change or bleed-over - since it's my personal view Prophet at this stage is standing in the way.  Yes, that's my personal take and not from the book at all, no one's book but my own!  Conceptually, I can't help but connect in my head. 

As the High moves "Higher" (as more problems get solved -- really solved, not just addressed) more Prophet archetype is dying.  Being replaced by the new crop.  In fact, the probably defining trait of Prophet in birth is they do not know and have not experienced the Crisis.  They only know the High and it's why they rebel later.  They have no understanding of the sacrifices made (for them) and, thus, are rather flippant to tear down everything their parents created while they were in the "womb", so to speak.

I know a direct correlation model


it looks like this, it's used in economy 101, it means moving from zero to greater either going right or going up (one thing moves on the x axis the other on the y) and when one moves, the other moves.

As Prophet leaves the scene, problems get solved.

Someone mentioned these same problems would not even have been addressed if not for Prophet.  I mentioned, also, that archetypes change throughout time and with age.  Prophet perhaps sparked the fire of climate care, but could never agree on how to do it.  Example. So, when they cache out, the problem was addressed but not solved.  The "solution" comes only after they leave.  "solution" in this case might be a major increment of change, and not necessarily a 100% solved situation.

That's just how I see it.  I'm reducing it far down to a simmering zeal. It's actually quite logical, this.

[Eric the Green]

A fourth turning with no prophetic cause that people fought for? With no bickering, and no values?

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
—Abraham Lincoln