Okay, so I am clearly piggybacking off of the thread directly below: Artist-Nomad relations. But hey, it's a free country! (for now)

What I find interesting is that when you have a Prophet-Hero family structure, the relationship seems good and the generation gap is minimal, for a long time. Millennials report being extremely close to, trusting of, and dependent on their parents, more so than in previous generations. Of course there are exceptions (duh), but this is the trend. This has happened before. In the 1920s, '30s, and even '40s, G.I. youth looked up very respectfully to their Missionary elders as wise visionaries who could lead them (the G.I.s) to greatness. During the Revolution, Jefferson and his cohorts took their cues from the Benjamin Franklin Awakeners, who led as grand elders during a time of urgency.

So a Prophet elder - Hero youth structure in society always occurs in Crises, and has positive generational effects. I see it today. My peers seem to mostly have a very respectful view of our Boomer parents.

But during an Awakening, with a Hero elder - Prophet youth structure, the generation gap is negative, disrespectful, and tense. Why? In the '60s and '70s, Boomers sought to throw out every institution and value their G.I. parents stood for. G.I.s were aghast, of course. And during the Transcendental Awakening, Transcendentals like Lincoln and Susan B. Anthony rejected their Republican (as in Jefferson/Madison, not Gingrich) predecessors' systems. You may have heard about letters Jefferson wrote decrying the disregard the youth of the 1820s had for what his peers had worked so hard to accomplish.

So again, I ask: Why do Hero youth look up to Prophet elders, and Prophet youth have no respect for Hero elders? During Crises, there has been cooperation between Prophets and Heroes, but during Awakenings, the generation gap is fierce between Heroes and Prophets. My grandmother (G.I., 1915) is one of the very few G.I.s with Missionary parents (both born 1881), so my familial structure is similar to what hers was. She says she always had great regard for FDR, Upton Sinclair, and the Missionary orators of the day. But my Dad (Boomer, 1947), like most of his peers, spent the '60s and '70s rebelling against his parents' status quo. And that is so typical. I love my parents; I even love most Boomers and what they stood for. But something tells me my kids won't be so appreciative.

Your thoughts?

Originally Posted by 1990

Okay, so I am clearly piggybacking off of the thread directly below: Artist-Nomad relations. But hey, it's a free country! (for now)

What I find interesting is that when you have a Prophet-Hero family structure, the relationship seems good and the generation gap is minimal, for a long time. Millennials report being extremely close to, trusting of, and dependent on their parents, more so than in previous generations. Of course there are exceptions (duh), but this is the trend. This has happened before. In the 1920s, '30s, and even '40s, G.I. youth looked up very respectfully to their Missionary elders as wise visionaries who could lead them (the G.I.s) to greatness. During the Revolution, Jefferson and his cohorts took their cues from the Benjamin Franklin Awakeners, who led as grand elders during a time of urgency.

So a Prophet elder - Hero youth structure in society always occurs in Crises, and has positive generational effects. I see it today. My peers seem to mostly have a very respectful view of our Boomer parents.

But during an Awakening, with a Hero elder - Prophet youth structure, the generation gap is negative, disrespectful, and tense. Why? In the '60s and '70s, Boomers sought to throw out every institution and value their G.I. parents stood for. G.I.s were aghast, of course. And during the Transcendental Awakening, Transcendentals like Lincoln and Susan B. Anthony rejected their Republican (as in Jefferson/Madison, not Gingrich) predecessors' systems. You may have heard about letters Jefferson wrote decrying the disregard the youth of the 1820s had for what his peers had worked so hard to accomplish.

So again, I ask: Why do Hero youth look up to Prophet elders, and Prophet youth have no respect for Hero elders? During Crises, there has been cooperation between Prophets and Heroes, but during Awakenings, the generation gap is fierce between Heroes and Prophets. My grandmother (G.I., 1915) is one of the very few G.I.s with Missionary parents (both born 1881), so my familial structure is similar to what hers was. She says she always had great regard for FDR, Upton Sinclair, and the Missionary orators of the day. But my Dad (Boomer, 1947), like most of his peers, spent the '60s and '70s rebelling against his parents' status quo. And that is so typical. I love my parents; I even love most Boomers and what they stood for. But something tells me my kids won't be so appreciative.

Your thoughts?

The short version: Boomers rebelled because we could. Other than the Vietnam War, times were basically pretty good. The worst of the Civil
Rights strife was already in the past, we had been raised to follow our own stars and those two things alone made rebellion almost a given. We stopped rebelling when the real world started to intrude on our flights of fancy.

There's nothing like a few of your closest firiends ODing and ending up in the morgue to focus the mind. Some, like our current President, found Jesus before the drugs or the booze finished them off. You can argue whether that was a good thing.

Originally Posted by 1990

Okay, so I am clearly piggybacking off of the thread directly below: Artist-Nomad relations. But hey, it's a free country! (for now)

What I find interesting is that when you have a Prophet-Hero family structure, the relationship seems good and the generation gap is minimal, for a long time. Millennials report being extremely close to, trusting of, and dependent on their parents, more so than in previous generations. Of course there are exceptions (duh), but this is the trend. This has happened before. In the 1920s, '30s, and even '40s, G.I. youth looked up very respectfully to their Missionary elders as wise visionaries who could lead them (the G.I.s) to greatness. During the Revolution, Jefferson and his cohorts took their cues from the Benjamin Franklin Awakeners, who led as grand elders during a time of urgency.

So a Prophet elder - Hero youth structure in society always occurs in Crises, and has positive generational effects. I see it today. My peers seem to mostly have a very respectful view of our Boomer parents.

But during an Awakening, with a Hero elder - Prophet youth structure, the generation gap is negative, disrespectful, and tense. Why? In the '60s and '70s, Boomers sought to throw out every institution and value their G.I. parents stood for. G.I.s were aghast, of course. And during the Transcendental Awakening, Transcendentals like Lincoln and Susan B. Anthony rejected their Republican (as in Jefferson/Madison, not Gingrich) predecessors' systems. You may have heard about letters Jefferson wrote decrying the disregard the youth of the 1820s had for what his peers had worked so hard to accomplish.

So again, I ask: Why do Hero youth look up to Prophet elders, and Prophet youth have no respect for Hero elders? During Crises, there has been cooperation between Prophets and Heroes, but during Awakenings, the generation gap is fierce between Heroes and Prophets. My grandmother (G.I., 1915) is one of the very few G.I.s with Missionary parents (both born 1881), so my familial structure is similar to what hers was. She says she always had great regard for FDR, Upton Sinclair, and the Missionary orators of the day. But my Dad (Boomer, 1947), like most of his peers, spent the '60s and '70s rebelling against his parents' status quo. And that is so typical. I love my parents; I even love most Boomers and what they stood for. But something tells me my kids won't be so appreciative.

Your thoughts?

Survivors of World War II were completely traumatized by the war, and
had as a major life goal that their children should never have to
suffer anything so awful. So they imposed austere rules and
restrictions on their children. The Boomer children went through a
"high" era of giddiness and happiness that was eclipsed only by
their parents' austere rules and restrictions, so they rebelled. But
they raised their own kids with an attitude of "If it feels good,
then do it," so the new Heroes really had nothing to rebel against.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

One thing I am quite aware of - having just spent the weekend at my folks' place - is that they operate in an environment where they 1) feel they are obliged to respond to a situation by coming up with a BIG solution and 2) sincerely believe their opinions matter.

The Gen X environment is wholly different. I think we feel we 1) are expected to critique rather than solve and 2) when problems do arrive we solve them one at a time, rather than coming up with a BIG solution.

I wonder if this is due to how we were educated. Did teachers in the "High" classroom ask their students for BIG solutions to problems? Did they make them feel that their opinion mattered? Why is that my folks can't watch the news without saying? "Well you know what I think they should do ..."

Originally Posted by Uzi

One thing I am quite aware of - having just spent the weekend at my folks' place - is that they operate in an environment where they 1) feel they are obliged to respond to a situation by coming up with a BIG solution and 2) sincerely believe their opinions matter.

The Gen X environment is wholly different. I think we feel we 1) are expected to critique rather than solve and 2) when problems do arrive we solve them one at a time, rather than coming up with a BIG solution.

I wonder if this is due to how we were educated. Did teachers in the "High" classroom ask their students for BIG solutions to problems? Did they make them feel that their opinion mattered? Why is that my folks can't watch the news without saying? "Well you know what I think they should do ..."

This brings back cusper memories. Looking back, it does seem that in elementary school, we were encouraged to use our imaginations more. By the time I was in high school in the late 70's, it seemed like most of the adult world found all kinds of non verbal ways to let us know that they really didn't care what we thought about anything. Yeah, we had a lot of "freedom" in high school, but that was more because most of the so called educators we had didn't really care about anything except putting in enough time to get a pension.


...And we picked up on it quickly.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Yeah, we had a lot of "freedom" in high school, but that was more because most of the so called educators we had didn't really care about anything except putting in enough time to get a pension.

I had the same teachers you did. By the time I was in high school [mid90s] they were genteel old looneys waxing poetic about their 1940s childhoods and 1950s adolescences and waiting to be set out to pasture. Most retired within a year or two of me being in their classes.

But we're off topic. This is about civics and heroes, and I am neither.

Originally Posted by Uzi

I had the same teachers you did. By the time I was in high school [mid90s] they were genteel old looneys waxing poetic about their 1940s childhoods and 1950s adolescences and waiting to be set out to pasture. Most retired within a year or two of me being in their classes.

Yes, I guess that we've discussed their careers full circle. Being a jones cusper, I was able to get through elementary school before the awakening burned out a critcal mass of the teachers that I had as a student. Core X'ers no doubt were even more on their own in seeking a quality education.

Where I currently work, I sometimes collaberate with public school educators on specific projects. The teachers that I work with tend to range in age from core boomers to core Xers. It is good to know that most of them seem to have the kind of dedication to their millie students that we would have liked to have experenced in high school.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Yes, I guess that we've discussed their careers full circle. Being a jones cusper, I was able to get through elementary school before the awakening burned out a critcal mass of the teachers that I had as a student. Core X'ers no doubt were even more on their own in seeking a quality education.

Where I currently work, I sometimes collaberate with public school educators on specific projects. The teachers that I work with tend to range in age from core boomers to core Xers. It is good to know that most of them seem to have the kind of dedication to their millie students that we would have liked to have experenced in high school.

I dunno, I was taught to focus on the core problem, fix it and leave the rest alone. I had great teachers, I had good teachers and I had teachers who sucked. I received a quality education in school that focused on developing individual hearts and minds. We had three levels of education within one education program. Our community had three levels of social classes within one community. The education system reflected the values and the makeup of the community. We were heavily challenged to think on our own and solve problems without allot of teacher assistance. The teachers were demanding and believed in developing adults with individualistic qualities and asked that we helped out each other to find answers vs relying on them for all the answers. I think this forum is so rapped up in theory, polarization that it completely overlooks the known truths that exist in very large numbers in the real world.

Originally Posted by K-I-A 67

I dunno, I was taught to focus on the core problem, fix it and leave the rest alone. I had great teachers, I had good teachers and I had teachers who sucked. I received a quality education in school that focused on developing individual hearts and minds. We had three levels of education within one education program. Our community had three levels of social classes within one community. The education system reflected the values and the makeup of the community. We were heavily challenged to think on our own and solve problems without allot of teacher assistance. The teachers were demanding and believed in developing adults with individualistic qualities and asked that we helped out each other to find answers vs relying on them for all the answers. I think this forum is so rapped up in theory, polarization that it completely overlooks the known truths that exist in very large numbers in the real world.

I similarly had no problem with the "Mr. Rogers" approach to teaching. They made life bearable in a world of Boomer deans and administrators.

I have read a lot of pop articles about generations and how they act, and I think most of them are pretty much filler. But I do recall being in high school and junior high school and noticing on a fairly regular basis that it was easier for me to relate to and communicate with older teachers and administrators than "Boomer" ones.

Many of the "Boomer" ones falsely believed that their position earned them respect and that their orders should be taken without question. The older administrators and professors used patience and reasoning to convince youth of the difference between wrong and right. A Boomer teacher could have you sent to detention for reasons you weren't quite sure of. A Silent administrator - at least the ones I dealt with - would try to reason with you, talk to you - treat you as more of an equal than a number.

I don't think either way worked very well, but I believe my worldview is more tolerant and less fearful because I had solid teachers that had open-minded classrooms where you weren't afraid to ask questions and education was seen more of a natural progression of exposure to ideas than a numbers game of standardized tests.

Originally Posted by Uzi

Many of the "Boomer" ones falsely believed that their position earned them respect and that their orders should be taken without question. The older administrators and professors used patience and reasoning to convince youth of the difference between wrong and right. A Boomer teacher could have you sent to detention for reasons you weren't quite sure of. A Silent administrator - at least the ones I dealt with - would try to reason with you, talk to you - treat you as more of an equal than a number.

In my early years of high school (this is in a small town in the boonies of rural Minnesota) the principal was an extemely kind, funny, and caring Slilent; Ol' Gordy is one of the nicest guy's you'll ever meet. Gordy eventually retired and was replaced by a late-wave boomer that was an arrogant, dictatorial @sshole.

A while ago someone, I think either Barbara '30 or Lis Libengood (whom I believe was born in the 40s?), said they recalled US GI parents being so freaked out by the unquestioning obedience of their own age-mates in Germany that they made sure to raise young Boomers to think for themselves and not blindly follow orders.

Food for thought.

Originally Posted by Neisha '67

A while ago someone, I think either Barbara '30 or Lis Libengood (whom I believe was born in the 40s?), said they recalled US GI parents being so freaked out by the unquestioning obedience of their own age-mates in Germany that they made sure to raise young Boomers to think for themselves and not blindly follow orders.

Food for thought.

Lis Libengood was born in 1954. She may well have had GI parents, however.

According to the author, James Bennett, the G.I.s failed to distinguish between bounded problems and unbounded problems.

"The former are the sort typical of engineering problems, having a finite and definable number of elements and a predictable set of significant interactions. The latter, which includes the issues of predicting and understanding very large systems such as the weather, natural ecologies, or complex human economies, are characterized by extremely large numbers of elements and near-infinite sets of possible interactions.

"...Methods such as McNamara's operational analysis, which produced wondrous results applied to even complex bounded problems, failed miserably when applied to unbounded problems.

"...the prevailing overconfidence of the 1960s led U.S. political authorities to begin applying techniques used successfully on bounded problems to address unbounded problems. The question 'If we can put a man on the moon , why can't we do X?' became a trap for authorities, because the true answer, not well understood at the time, usually was, 'Because putting a man on the moon was a bounded problem, and X is an unbounded problem.'

"...The scientists and engineers of midcentury America have been accused of hubris by later commentators.

"But this hubris did not consist of pride in their achievements; rather, it came from assuming that their techniques had become so powerful that all problems could be reduced and addressed by their systems engineering techniques."

"The 1970s and 1980s brought a general reaction to and skepticism about the problem solving ability of science and technology. Unforetunately, this skepticism was no more understanding of the bounded/unbounded distinction than than of the engineers and planners it criticized. This led to the throwing out of the baby with the bathwater: a belief that no problems could be successfully addressed by science or engineering."

Bennett described Y2K as a bounded problem that was thought to be an unbounded problem. Y2K was solvable, just requiring a lot of tedious work.

Bennett described the space program as a bounded, if very challenging, problem.

I don't know that many Millies that "look up" to Boomers. Most of my peers, fairly or not, look at the Boomers as the ones who messed up the world for us to clean up. There's a lot of resentment there. Then again, most of my peers are cuspers like me. I don't know how much of that is X influence. And I think it's also a first-wave thing. I think the second wave is what most people think of when they think of Heroes. They are much more likely to have Prophet parents and have Prophet kids. My kids will be Artists.

My parents are both Jonesers. My mother, however, tends a lot more to the Prophet side. I do look up to her and respect her immensely. However, the resentment is still there. Her private college tuition in the early 80s was less than my public college tuition today. She and my father were able to buy a house while raising me and going to college. I can't afford to rent an apartment while going to college. Which is where the dependence comes in. We're at a place in the cycle when it is a lot harder to start life as a young adult. That does lead to a lot more parental dependence. But I think every kid in that situation really resents it.

I think it's different the later into the generation you get. I recently went back to college and most of my classmates are core Millies. There's a whole different dynamic there. A lot of parents of my classmates seem to pay for everything. It amazes me. They even built a new dorm on campus that has concierge service, flat-screen TVs, and a bunch of other luxury crap that I find sickening, especially considering the neighborhood our school is in. But I also tend to find that the ones that materially spoil their kids think it makes up for their emotional absence.

I think there is always tension between Prophets and Heroes. I think it's natural, considering that Prophets are individual-minded and Heroes community-minded. Heroes are disgusted at the perceived selfishness of Prophets and Prophets are disgusted at what they see as Heroes' stifling of the individual. I just think that the Prophets tend to grow up in extreme prosperity, making it a lot easier for them to rebel. Heroes have a lot more to lose, so we tend to cooperate as much as possible with everyone. Plus we just don't like to fight. Prophets love it.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

According to the author, James Bennett, the G.I.s failed to distinguish between bounded problems and unbounded problems.

"The former are the sort typical of engineering problems, having a finite and definable number of elements and a predictable set of significant interactions. The latter, which includes the issues of predicting and understanding very large systems such as the weather, natural ecologies, or complex human economies, are characterized by extremely large numbers of elements and near-infinite sets of possible interactions.

"...Methods such as McNamara's operational analysis, which produced wondrous results applied to even complex bounded problems, failed miserably when applied to unbounded problems.

"...the prevailing overconfidence of the 1960s led U.S. political authorities to begin applying techniques used successfully on bounded problems to address unbounded problems. The question 'If we can put a man on the moon , why can't we do X?' became a trap for authorities, because the true answer, not well understood at the time, usually was, 'Because putting a man on the moon was a bounded problem, and X is an unbounded problem.'

"...The scientists and engineers of midcentury America have been accused of hubris by later commentators.

"But this hubris did not consist of pride in their achievements; rather, it came from assuming that their techniques had become so powerful that all problems could be reduced and addressed by their systems engineering techniques."

Interesting. It very much makes sense to me. The GIs thought society could be managed as if it was some giant mechanical contraption. In the end the GIs succumbed to what philosopher Daniel Dennett calls "Greedy Reductionism" (a good example was the radical behaviorist psychology of B. F. Skinner, which was overthrown by Functionalism, which is the philosophical basis of AI).

Originally Posted by fayeumi82

I don't know that many Millies that "look up" to Boomers. Most of my peers, fairly or not, look at the Boomers as the ones who messed up the world for us to clean up.

Heh. X'ers have been saying that for a long time.

There's a lot of resentment there. Then again, most of my peers are cuspers like me. I don't know how much of that is X influence. And I think it's also a first-wave thing. I think the second wave is what most people think of when they think of Heroes. They are much more likely to have Prophet parents and have Prophet kids. My kids will be Artists.

Uhhh.. I think the 2nd Millie wave would have X'er parents with a bell curve pattern.

My parents are both Jonesers. My mother, however, tends a lot more to the Prophet side. I do look up to her and respect her immensely. However, the resentment is still there. Her private college tuition in the early 80s was less than my public college tuition today. She and my father were able to buy a house while raising me and going to college.

As a Jonser on the X'er side of the thing, yes I would agree on the tuition you mentioned. I think what's missing from the above logic is the *ability* to even make it through college. Where I atteneded grammar school, we had this crazy assed experiment in letting the kids run the schools. Prophets as you say are individualists and Jonsers have this in spades so yes to that. My guess your parents managed to avoid quite a few mines to get to where they are at present. The mines are pretty well documented on this site.

I can't afford to rent an apartment while going to college. Which is where the dependence comes in. We're at a place in the cycle when it is a lot harder to start life as a young adult. That does lead to a lot more parental dependence. But I think every kid in that situation really resents it.

I think the X'ers in general would agree. I think the good news is that the current housing bust will let you get a house for pennies on the dollar in a few years. This happened in the oil patch in the late 1980's when I got my first house. The same thing is going on all over again, but seems to be more wide spread and far more severe. As a suggestion, just turn off the TeeVee and use a bit of Jonser indivdualism to decide for yourself as to when to buy said house. (Jonserdom does have some advantages...)

I think it's different the later into the generation you get. I recently went back to college and most of my classmates are core Millies. There's a whole different dynamic there. A lot of parents of my classmates seem to pay for everything. It amazes me. They even built a new dorm on campus that has concierge service, flat-screen TVs, and a bunch of other luxury crap that I find sickening, especially considering the neighborhood our school is in. But I also tend to find that the ones that materially spoil their kids think it makes up for their emotional absence.

Actually I'd substitute "go more into debt" for "pay". In this case I think both parties are in for a rude awakening.

I think there is always tension between Prophets and Heroes. I think it's natural, considering that Prophets are individual-minded and Heroes community-minded. Heroes are disgusted at the perceived selfishness of Prophets and Prophets are disgusted at what they see as Heroes' stifling of the individual. I just think that the Prophets tend to grow up in extreme prosperity, making it a lot easier for them to rebel. Heroes have a lot more to lose, so we tend to cooperate as much as possible with everyone. Plus we just don't like to fight. Prophets love it.

Yes, but I think one of the defining properties of prophets is they bicker with every generation, save Artists. I.E. they (we?) bicker with other prophets,nomads, and of course heros. So there you have it from the Nomad/Prophet cusp, fwiw.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

Heh. X'ers have been saying that for a long time.

Yes, but I think one of the defining properties of prophets is they bicker with every generation, save Artists. I.E. they (we?) bicker with other prophets,nomads, and of course heros. So there you have it from the Nomad/Prophet cusp, fwiw.

Their nastiest "bickering" has been with each other, and that created the severity of the Civil War 4T. Intragenerational disputes between Boom factions are very much alive, and the GWB coalition of corporatists, libertarians, and fundies has fallen apart due to contradictions of interests other than cheap labor and weak government. Corporate media may be quite right-wing in economic values, but they aren't going to sacrifice lucrative (if depraved) mass media to please the fundies.

There is now no dominant Boom coalition... and those Boom factions are trying to win support from other generations. The 4T coalition is yet to form -- suggesting that we are still in a 3T, empty and unsatisfying as it may still be.