I’m continuing my reporting on the next installment from Conservative Estimate, the recently founded website that is devoted to demolishing Conservatism.
Yesterday, Alfred George discussed the interaction between Religion and Tradition, and he showed that society must disregard both of them when they try to remain unchanging even though they harm society by doing so.
Today he considers what happens when society relies overly much on Tradition and refuses to keep pace with change.
Let’s take a look at his argument after the orange thing.
Mr. George begins by noting that Tradition does not like to change. This mirrors the inner disposition of most people, who dislike change and find it unsettling. But this sets them up for a fall:
To rely on tradition too much, to insist that you keep to the old ways in nearly all circumstances, is to cut yourself off from the ability to adapt. And if you can’t adapt, you can never make an ally out of change—which is the only way to keep up with the reality, which is constantly in flux, always shifting, continually altering.
And this is especially so because the world contains much more change than stability.
It is clear on casual observation that change is more prevalent than stasis. Everything is changing constantly, from the tiniest particles that constitute matter to the minute-by-minute course of our lives. In fact, Tradition soothes people precisely because it tries to put up a roadblock to this constant change. . . . But this trick is only necessary because we are upset by the fact the everything is always changing.
Mr. George then argues that the emotional satisfaction we get from trying to carve out an unchanging area of our lives can lead, if not checked by adherence to reality, to self-destruction. We need far more comfort with
adaptability than most people seem willing to develop.
Adaptability to change is essential both to survival and to creativity. It is obvious that survival depends on it. If your climate dries up so that water is impossible to access, then it’s time to pack up and move. Trying to deny this reality and pretend that the old traditions of water-collecting are still valid is just acting out a death-wish.
Refusal to adapt is also refusal to be creative:
It is perhaps less obvious that over-reliance on tradition is death to creativity—but only a bit less obvious. Certainly any one who has worked in an office situation can understand the lack of creative vision that hounds corporate life. . . .
Indeed many people adhere to tradition precisely because they don’t want to have to exercise any creativity. Creativity is dangerous, untested, open to criticism. It requires you to change your normal way of thinking—and most people can’t seem to do this without also getting upset that their normal way of thinking may not be good enough.
Tradition and creativity can be compatible, but for the most part, people regard them as opposites. Truly creative people, however, know how to transform Tradition, and make something new from the storehouse of old materials.
You can read the whole post
here.
Tomorrow Mr. George will discuss just how much we should allow Tradition to influence our lives.
I’ll be reporting back each day as a new installment appears.