Is that way because it is that way and stays that way because it has always been that way. 🤦🏼♂️
Discussion
What do you mean Whise Rabbit?
That’s the argument conservatives put forward to defend traditional values.
The world is changing, it’s a constant dynamic process and one has to embrace it gracefully instead of rejecting it judgingly.
Oh, I undestand now, thanks for explaining it 🫂
Yes, I understand that pont but mine is not like "reject all change"
The point is:
- change is dangerous, there are more ways to degrade the current functioning order than ways to improve it. Is a pure statistical fact of complex sustems
- but not changeing also is dangerous, you miss the chance to adopt better ideas.
The common progressive mistake is to think that all change is for good, and they most of the time throw the baby with the bath water
The common conservative mistake is to not change at all.
For me the wise course of action is to mimic nature, who is wise enough to know that some things are too complex to just "solve for X" and apply that one-size-fits-all solution.
Natures try everithing, and keeps what works in the long run. No answer is absolute.
We can do the same by allowing people to try differen rates of change in their lives from 0% (amish I.E.) to 100%(progresive trying new social roles and practices). But IMO you are mistaken in asking everybody to join your journey into the unknown long term consequienses of messing with complex social institutions, the same kind of mistake a conservative woud do by asking everybody to not try and do new stuff
This seems way more balanced than presuming a psyop strategy to undermine society.
I don’t believe that there are more ways degrading the status quo science I see it as pretty destructive as is but certainly changes towards a more authoritarian mindset are dangerous and should be challenged.
My current stance is guided by the occam principle or at least I try that, but make no mistake, people are actively trying to push for agendas that are factually opposed to human prosperity but you really need to be open to admit that such people exist in order to see it. It makes me wonder, people can make mistakes while trying to improve things on good faith, but doing exactly the opposit of what we can tell is good and stood the test of time, why?
For example, actively celebrating different ways to build a family while the normal family structure (2 parents at home) is prooven to be the best predictor for children going to collage. And examples like this are the norm, not the exception as far as I can tell
I think that you may be taking for granted the problems we don't have thanks to our traditions, and I cant blame you 1st because I did the same and 2nd because "good design is harder to spot since it doesn get in our way" (see The design of everyday things). Also, with complex systems you never really know long term effects and causal conextion in different variables, so if you try to design you tend to only sweep what you can't understand under the carpet and only decide based in what info you can understand, which tends to be limited, only to be caught by surprise later on by unforseen consequenses. (You can find good examples in "Systemantics")
I would say there is little room for improvement in social institutions (though not 0, things can get better) but if we could weight the pros and cons of the changes we propose we woud probably preffer the current problems as a tradeoff.
Sorry for the wall of text😂😹, I love discussing this issues because there is a lot of material that is extremely compelling evidence from evulutionary biology to psicology that goes against a lot of what we are being fed (or what we voluntary consume in our genuine desore to make things better)
No need to apologize. If you want to discuss certain issues it would be helpful to be more concrete on narratives that you seem to have compelling evidence against.
One would be the idea of "challenging traditional male and female role models"
For example: women being mayority in one field (nurses) Vs men being mayority in other (engineering). Most of the people take this as a proof of how society bias men and women toward "traditional roles" but studies have shown that even babis show differences in prefferences that are sex dependan, even more! Even chimpanzee babies show this, wich is a good way to infer that difference in prefferences are innate, so deeply rooted that our closest relatives have it too. 🤯
A link to the experiment
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/
And this is only one concrete example that I remember from the top of my head but is the rule, not the exception
(Take this as general trends but statistically significant, of course there are particular cases for almost anything)