Tradition?

[DamnthePants]

It has always been a tenet of mine that we must not become a slave to Tradition.

Things become traditions because they happen over and over again. As long as we WANT to do something that is traditional, or it otherwise goes on, not harming anything, it can exist. It is when Tradition interferes with modern life, or we have a desier to attempt to establish something new, that we must not find ourselves saying, "But I cant, because it is tradition to..."; and then fail to do what we desire.

We make Traditions. Traditions do not make us.

[Chas]

It has always been a tenet of mine that we must not become a slave to Tradition.

Things become traditions because they happen over and over again. As long as we WANT to do something that is traditional, or it otherwise goes on, not harming anything, it can exist. It is when Tradition interferes with modern life, or we have a desier to attempt to establish something new, that we must not find ourselves saying, "But I cant, because it is tradition to..."; and then fail to do what we desire.

We make Traditions. Traditions do not make us.

I have no desire to be insulting or deliberately antagonistic, but there is nothing in what you have written with which I can agree. In fact, I would go as far as to say that it is all wrong.

Traditions exist only because they are of benefit to the majority of the people involved in that activity. That activity might be living in a certain country, or being part of a family, or following a particular profession or sport, or one of the many other things to which people align themselves i.e. kilt wearing.

People are, by their very nature, creatures of habit. It is how we learn to survive, first as children and then as adults. Our religions and our laws are only traditions that have been codified. Good manners and respect are only traditions.

Change for the sake of change, has never in the whole of human history, benefited anyone. Anarchy is the outcome.

Traditions do not make us.

Of course they do. We are all hand crafted by the traditions that have been in place since the day we were born. I think you have broken your tenet every day of your life and that is no bad thing.

Regards

Chas

[Lyle1]

Traditions exist only because they are of benefit to the majority of the people involved in that activity. That activity might be living in a certain country, or being part of a family, or following a particular profession or sport, or one of the many other things to which people align themselves i.e. kilt wearing.



Of course they do. We are all hand crafted by the traditions that have been in place since the day we were born. I think you have broken your tenet every day of your life and that is no bad thing.

Regards

Chas

Traditions are not bad, but I cannot agree with that they only exist when they benefit the majority.

Who benefits when tradition dictates the color of one's shoes or sporran or by being told what to wear for every occasion? Maybe the people who make and sell shoes, or maybe the socioeconomic class can afford the prescribed fashions and thus function on a higher social plain than those who cannot.

Are we handcrafted by the traditions that were in place since the day we were born? Many social traditions that limited the rights of minorities were happily embraced when I was a child have been largely, and I think, rightfully, rejected.

Traditions can provide a guideline for how we live our lives, but I think each of us has the right, and even, a responsibility to reject some traditions that for whatever reason, we find unacceptable.


The American poet, Ralph Waldo Emerson, expressed it better than I do:

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Since this is about the "traditions" that go hand in hand with wearing the kilt, and not a polemic on the socio-economics of kilt wearers, or the rights of minority groups, I will address that question you have raised that is on topic:

Who benefits when tradition dictates the color of one's shoes or sporran or by being told what to wear for every occasion?

The beneficiary is that individual who may be unaware of the customary mode of attire associated with wearing the kilt on a specific occasion, but none-the-less does not wish to appear ignorant in front of his peers.

[Chas]

Traditions are not bad, but I cannot agree with that they only exist when they benefit the majority. Who else are they for - the minority - every minority. Humans would never do that. When the benefit stops so does the tradition. From one day to the next sometimes. No one ever said that traditions were to be immutable, for ever and ever, world without end, Amen.

Who benefits when tradition dictates the color of one's shoes or sporran or by being told what to wear for every occasion? The benefit comes from belonging to that group of people who wear that colour of shoes on that type of occasion. If you want to be part of that group, you do what that group does. Families have many traditions that individuals may not like, but they put up with them rather than leave the family. Every day millions of men, worldwide wear a piece of clothing to show their allegiance to a particular sporting team. Millions of Sikh men wear a turban in the colours of their political party. The benefit to all these people is the 'belonging', being part of a greater entity. Maybe the people who make and sell shoes, or maybe the socioeconomic class can afford the prescribed fashions and thus function on a higher social plain than those who cannot. Cobblers and shoe-sellers will make or sell shoes for which there is a market. A good example which is pertinent to our interest is buckle brogues. The major manufacturer in the UK was in Birmingham, a company called 'Kilties'. As the tradition of wearing kilts waned in post-war Britain, so did the wearing of buckle brogues. They stopped manufacture in the mid 70's. There was no benefit to them, so they stopped making them.

Are we handcrafted by the traditions that were in place since the day we were born? Many social traditions that limited the rights of minorities were happily embraced when I was a child have been largely, and I think, rightfully, rejected. But of course! As the benefit to the majority changes so will the tradition. In this case the benefit might be having a clear conscience.

Traditions can provide a guideline for how we live our lives, but I think each of us has the right, and even, a responsibility to reject some traditions that for whatever reason, we find unacceptable. That's all very well as far as it goes. If a person wants to belong to a certain group, or set, or club, or society, or society in general one has to adopt the mores and traditions of that group. One doesn't have the right to pick and choose. The best example is X Marks The Scot itself. We have a set of rules called the Forum Rules.
http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/view.php?pg=forumrules
Anyone joining us and those who are already members agree to abide by these rules. No one has the right to ignore a rule because they find it unacceptable.

The American poet, Ralph Waldo Emerson, expressed it better than I do:

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."

I know of only one quote that will fit; it comes from my Mother; she's 91 this year.

"If you don't like the way we're rowing this boat - get out of the boat. Oh - mind the sharks."

In all of this, no one has mentioned improvement. If a tradition is legally,morally or ethically wrong, then of course it needs to be changed.

For something better.

But if the tradition does no harm and there is a perceived benefit to those practising it, why should it be changed?

Here in Europe, we have traditions that go back, in some cases a thousand years. We are not so quick to give them up or even contemplate it.

Regards

Chas

[Lyle1]

I know of only one quote that will fit; it comes from my Mother; she's 91 this year.

"If you don't like the way we're rowing this boat - get out of the boat. Oh - mind the sharks."
[/I]

I don't much care for cutesy aphorisms; they often blur the meaning.

I assume that basically, if obliquely, you are suggesting that if I do not agree with you, I should leave the forum. If everyone who did not agree with you left, you would not longer" have a forum. What you would be left with could best be described with another "F" word -- FLOCK!