Originally Posted by Odin
Odin, should you ever choose to have kids, this is a great talent to have cultivated.
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Posts
- 656
According to this born in 1981 I would be a Nomad/micro-civic or Nomad/micro-artist?
I was trying to figure this out too. I was born in 1965 and came of age in the early to mid 1980's (83/84), so I guess that makes me nomad-nomad since I believe that was around the 3T turning.
What do you mean by people born after 1989 have a "dull porcelain doll" look in their eyes, and are more conformist?
he is saying you guys are a bunch of brainless sheep.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
Whops I was wrong, I am a Civic-artist
lame
I'm not good at art. I can play the french horn/trumpet I guess.
Last edited by Debol1990; 09-15-2010 at 06:41 PM.
Fallacy of using a word with a different meaning. Can't remember what you call that.Whops I was wrong, I am a Civic-artist
lame
I'm not good at art. I can play the french horn/trumpet I guess.
What?
I am a civic-artist. I think it's lame * frown face*. I;m not good at art (painting/sculpting/drawing). I can play the French horn and trumpet.
fallacy?
I'm skeptical of the micro-turnings. And btw, do you think of yourself as having porcelain doll eyes like Odin said above?
I kind of like it. I get to be a nomad-nomad. So whatever
The fallacy of equivocation.
Equivocation means using two meanings of a term which has several different possible meanings, obscuring the fact that your conclusion does not follow from your premises.
A funny example:
1. We must do something.
2. This is something.
3. Therefore, we must do it.
In step 1, "We must do something" is used figuratively to mean, "We must take action." Then in step 2 it's taken literally. A translation that makes the fallacy clear might be:
1. We must act.
2. This is one specific action.
3. Therefore we must do this.
The initial argument uses "[do] something" in two different senses while implying they are the same thing; the translation makes it clear that "to act" and "to take this specific action" are not the same thing. Thus the conclusion does not follow from the premises.
Likewise, Debol said:
1. If I were an Artist, I'd be good at art.
2. I'm not.
3. Therefore I'm not an Artist.
Which seems to make sense. But Strauss and Howe (and Chas) were using "Artist" figuratively -- as a label for their own idea of a generational personality, one which calls to mind "the artistic temperament." So when you translate the argument and remove the equivocation, you get:
1. If I did (or had the potential to do) art as a profession, I'd be good at art.
2. I'm not.
3. Therefore I don't have S&H's idea of the artistic temperament.
This conclusion obviously does not follow from the premises given. "Artist" can mean "someone who does (or could do) art as a profession"; it can also mean "S&H's generational description which is based on the artistic temperament." Debol was using the same word to mean two different things.
Thanks for noticing that, Adina! The fallacy of equivocation is a pet peeve of mine.
Thanks a lot debol1990, I needed to find an example of equivocation for my TOK class!
Are you going to tell them about S&H's theory?Thanks a lot debol1990, I needed to find an example of equivocation for my TOK class!
The whole micro-generations thing is something I'm not going to go out and support. It's an idea in development that I only am really half interested. BookishXer and Odin are much more interested in micro-generations than I am or probably would ever be.
~Chas'88
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
So which micro-generation thing do I seem the most like?
Thanks a lot debol1990, I needed to find an example of equivocation for my TOK class!
I still don't know what I said....It was either supremely stupid or profound.
I guess your welcome
Basically, words that sound the same can have different meanings. An example would be "night" or "knight". If English went through a spelling reform (since the "gh" in knight hasn't been pronounced in hundreds of years), they would be spelt the same way--as "nite" let's say. The word "nite" would then have two meanings: one being the opposite of day, the other being a rank. That does not mean that the meanings are interchangeable. What you said above was:"I am a Civic-artist...I'm not good at art. I can play the french horn/trumpet I guess." Now, the word "artist" as defined by S&H is a generational archetype. It has absolutely nothing to do with art whatsoever, just as a knight has nothing to do with night, just because they sound the same. So, you incorrectly assumed that S&H's definition of "artist" had something to do with ones artistic ability just because the word was the same. Just as, when you're talking about computers, you can't use the word driver (as relating to computers) to mean someone who drives a vehicle, just because they appear to be the same word.I still don't know what I said....It was either supremely stupid or profound.
I guess your welcome
Unfortunately my partner for the project I'm working on (who is also my very very best friend) found a better one that required a lot less explaining.
I can't explain the nuances of S&H in a 5 minute presentation.
I caught the explanation haha.
I was just messing around guys!
How did that go?Thanks a lot debol1990, I needed to find an example of equivocation for my TOK class!
Micro-Crisises Across Time
Here are a list of Micro-Crisises as I see them:
1863 - 1868: Civil War - Emancipation Proclamation
1883 - 1887: Reconstruction & Gilded Age - Haymarket Affair
1903 - 1908: Third Great Awakening - Square Deal
1923 - 1929: WWI & Prohibition - Roaring 20s & the Stock Market
1941 - 1946: Great Depression & WWII - WWII & foundation of the UN
1960 - 1964: American High - Civil Rights Act of 1964
1980 - 1984: Consciousness Revolution - Reagan Revolution
2000 - 2005: 9/11 & Homeland - Do I have to say why?
Why are they important?
There are a few reasons that I can think of:
1) It is when society can no longer support the existing culture of the Turning.
2) It is when a new sect of society takes hold and pushes through NEEDED change on a grand societal level, beginning to ferment the atmosphere and general feel of the next turning.
3) It is (generally) about the time when cuspers between generations are being born and when cuspers come of age.
~Chas'88
Last edited by Chas'88; 12-24-2010 at 09:46 PM.
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
I just posted this on another thread but could the shooting of Gifford be the beginning of the next Micro-turning?
If the crisis began in 2008 this could be the beginning of the crisis-awakening
If the crisis began in 2005 it could be the beginning of the crisis-unraveling
if the crisis began in 2001 this could be the beginning of the crisis-crisis.
Has the previous temperament of society been changed or intensified? As far as I can tell the Gifford shooting has only intensified the current Crisis-Awakening culture that started last year.
Much too early to be either the Crisis-Unraveling or the Crisis-Crisis.
~Chas'88
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
Completely agree with that, Chas. How long does each of your micro-turnings last? Five years?
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." —Albert Einstein
"The road to perdition has ever been accompanied by lip service to an ideal." —Albert Einstein
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.” —Albert Einstein
Most last 5 years, very few last 4 or 6.
~Chas'88
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
