Generations - a real effect?
So are generations, as in the labelled generations, a real effect? money.CNN.com thinks so, as do many, many others. The article on the end of that link tells us how to understand and work with the differences in attitudes between generations. It's easy to think along these lines - convenient even. But what's the evidence? Why indeed do we label ourselves Boomers or GenX or Y, or even Gen Next? Ostensibly because society evolved - changed - in more than subtle ways during the periods in question and we should recognise how the people born into these generations are indeed 'different' from each other. But are they?
My argument runs like this. Firstly, genetics is probably the most powerful influence shaping our lives. We act out our genome in the world, or our individual world, because where you are born matters a lot. In fact country, race, wealth, sex... you name it, these are all big players in our lives. Where you are born, the wealth and culture of your society and your individual family, and the education that you receive will act to shape your behaviours.
When you add all of that up it's hard to factor in "the Internet" as a big factor. Yet (to give but one example) the Gen Xers reputedly are more impatient than Boomers, having been brought up in an instant-on environment of which the Internet is a prime example. I would agree that a large proportion of the "1st World" born since 1967 have indeed grown up with PCs and maybe - just maybe - slow Internet; and that a large proportion of "1st World" Gen Yers will have the expectation of faster PCs, handy MP3 players and faster broadband Internet. But what proportion? And don't they still have parents telling them to wait in line? Don't they still have to wait in queues in the bricks and mortar world? Are they queue-jumpers as well as impatient?
Indeed, why do we say that they are impatient? Where's the evidence that frequent job-swapping is correlated with Internet use? Are we possibly putting the cart in front of the horse? Isn't it possible that the job-swapping comes about not because of an innate desire but because jobs now vanish, evolve and move in a way that didn't happen in the 1960s? Is it not true that female participation rates are now higher? Aren't many of us now better educated? Aren't our 1st-World economies now service-based rather than manufacturing based? Does none of this matter? Isn't it so much easier to just label the people?
When you total the World's population it's a small proportion that has been exposed to the nominated "generational" influencers, whereas everyone faces their genes, their need for food and shelter and company every day. And everyone - even the Boomers - live in today's world. Shouldn't today's "fast pace fo life" have rubbed off on them too, or are we saying that they really can't learn?
When you look at what the pre-Boomers went through - 2 successive World Wars - you can imagine the after effects. A shortage of males. A shortage of food, of shelter.... destruction in much of Europe and Japan, coupled with rebuilding would bring on huge changes in society. This is the argument for the post-War Boomers, that they grew up having 'known no war'. Yet we continue to have wars. Both before and since. And the effect varies with where you are standing. And humanity is a continuous, blended stream, not an on and off sausage machine churning out clones.
The Generations? It's just labelling. Treat people as people and don't get hung up on what you want to call 'em.
My argument runs like this. Firstly, genetics is probably the most powerful influence shaping our lives. We act out our genome in the world, or our individual world, because where you are born matters a lot. In fact country, race, wealth, sex... you name it, these are all big players in our lives. Where you are born, the wealth and culture of your society and your individual family, and the education that you receive will act to shape your behaviours.
When you add all of that up it's hard to factor in "the Internet" as a big factor. Yet (to give but one example) the Gen Xers reputedly are more impatient than Boomers, having been brought up in an instant-on environment of which the Internet is a prime example. I would agree that a large proportion of the "1st World" born since 1967 have indeed grown up with PCs and maybe - just maybe - slow Internet; and that a large proportion of "1st World" Gen Yers will have the expectation of faster PCs, handy MP3 players and faster broadband Internet. But what proportion? And don't they still have parents telling them to wait in line? Don't they still have to wait in queues in the bricks and mortar world? Are they queue-jumpers as well as impatient?
Indeed, why do we say that they are impatient? Where's the evidence that frequent job-swapping is correlated with Internet use? Are we possibly putting the cart in front of the horse? Isn't it possible that the job-swapping comes about not because of an innate desire but because jobs now vanish, evolve and move in a way that didn't happen in the 1960s? Is it not true that female participation rates are now higher? Aren't many of us now better educated? Aren't our 1st-World economies now service-based rather than manufacturing based? Does none of this matter? Isn't it so much easier to just label the people?
When you total the World's population it's a small proportion that has been exposed to the nominated "generational" influencers, whereas everyone faces their genes, their need for food and shelter and company every day. And everyone - even the Boomers - live in today's world. Shouldn't today's "fast pace fo life" have rubbed off on them too, or are we saying that they really can't learn?
When you look at what the pre-Boomers went through - 2 successive World Wars - you can imagine the after effects. A shortage of males. A shortage of food, of shelter.... destruction in much of Europe and Japan, coupled with rebuilding would bring on huge changes in society. This is the argument for the post-War Boomers, that they grew up having 'known no war'. Yet we continue to have wars. Both before and since. And the effect varies with where you are standing. And humanity is a continuous, blended stream, not an on and off sausage machine churning out clones.
The Generations? It's just labelling. Treat people as people and don't get hung up on what you want to call 'em.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home