I respectfully disagree.falopex wrote:Given that we are talking about an individual, we cannot really use Generational Dynamics itself to identify Snowden's characteristics until well after the fact and in the context of history since individuals of all archetypes may exist during all generational eras and since the influence of parents and other role models can override generational archetypes at the individual level. Basically, the problem is out of scope for GD. Furthermore, there is an implication inherent in GD theory that each cohort will transition into the next through a short period of blending and struggle as the older generation gradually makes way for the newer, since children can be born at any time during a generation rather than only on Day 1. As a result, generational archetypes can be unpredictably messy during transitions between cohorts. That's the sociological approach. For Edward Snowden, we need a psychological approach.
I would agree if you were claiming that a single individual can not disprove the GD theory.
It would also agree if you were claiming that a single individual can not prove the theory.
But to suggest that a scientific theory based on group behavior can not be used to predict the probability of behavior of an individual within that group flies in the face of the scientific method. It also varies from the standard practice of psychology which does use sociological group traits to predict individual behavior.
Example: Psychology predicts, in an overwhelming accurate manner, the different educational and economic individual results for members of different groups of very poor people in the United States; based on their membership in multi-generational ( greater than 3 generations ) U.S. citizen groups versus membership in 1st / 2nd generation immigrant groups.
Put another way the behavior of individual banking executives over the past 10 years could also be predicted based on generational affiliation.
You make some good points, but to use them to rule out the use of GD for predictions related to individuals is to not understand either the relevance of the points you make nor the proper use of the scientific method.