Actually the article's author brings up another work by Strauss and Howe, Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1584-2069, and strongly denounces it as

Actually the article's author brings up another work by Strauss and Howe, Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1584-2069, and strongly denounces it as "pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo". I'm not saying I agree with that (I haven't read that book), I'm just pointing out that the article's author doesn't hold those writers in high regard. The article does go into detail about the four archetypes before denouncing the theory. I will say I can't deny that there are defining generational markers throughout my lifetime; if the author of the parent article is to be believed, I should be thinking and seeing the world more or less exactly the same way as my 18 year old nieces since we are in the same socioeconomic class. However, that's simply not the case; while I do connect with them on many levels (we're all into anime and retro gaming, for example), their outlook on the world was shaped by what they experienced growing up in the 00s and 10s, just as mine was growing up in the 80s and 90s. There are some things that I will never understand about their point of view on a certain topic, and vice versa. I believe this has more to do with a generational gap than anything else, no matter what the author of the parent article says about "generational mumbo jumbo", and I was born the same year as the author (1977).