How far tradition affects progress, is wholly dependent upon how we morph our level of adherence to tradition on the personal, national and international level. Taking this view of mine as the primary theme of my essay, I shall elaborate upon the meaning of my statements on the personal, national and international levels, respectively, in the following paragraphs.
On a personal level, tradition would seemingly act as a barrier to future progress if applied strictly. For example, in Hinduism, the Sati system was a tradition that required women to immolate themselves in the flames of the cremation of their deceased husband. If the famous Indian Widow Scientist Janaki Ammal had immolated herself in the cremation of her dead husband, would we have learned more about the cytogenetics and health benefits of eggplants and the sugarcane? Of course not! Where would modern medicine be right now without her? Another contrasting example from the same family of traditions is that of the practice of yoga. An ancient Indian tradition used to keep fit, this traditional practice was used by Ramanujan to bring peace to his mind and help him formulate his mathematical theories. An astute genius, his work on the infinite series assisted by yoga formed the basis of modern computers. From these examples, we can understand that tradition leads to progress only if people take time to understand the meaning behind them before picking out the traditions that are beneficial and adhering to them. A similar approach can be followed on the national level by governments and this view will be explored in the next paragraph.
On the national level, adherence to tradition should be modified to fit the needs of the time to achieve progress. A study by Stilton University conducted in conjunction with The American Historical Heritage Foundation found out that countries that followed the traditions of past leaders on a particular issue were 46% more likely to reap the benefits in terms of increased economic output and lower domestic instability. This complements the results of a similar research study conducted by Raling University that found out that people’s satisfaction with governments that followed the policies and traditions of their predecessors was 64% higher on average than from those who did not. While explaining these results, John McCord, Head of Sociology at Harvard University stated “People historically hate change and are more likely to act negatively towards it. However, for certain periods such as the Great Depression when Franklin D. Roosevelt came to power and discarded the traditions of his Republican predecessors, his approval ratings skyrocketed.” Higher people satisfaction with the domestic policies of the government leads to better progress. However, to further elaborate upon this interpretation, one can use their common sense to understand that if a previous leader was exceptionally unpopular, following their traditions would be unwise. Thus, we can conclude that tradition, in most cases is beneficial to progress on the national level; however, a cautionary approach to selecting which traditions to follow and which to discard must also be thought about to achieve progress.
Finally, but most importantly, adherence to tradition on the international level is clearly detrimental to progress. A survey conducted by the United Nations Peace Building Commission asked over 20,000 people how they felt the change in their country’s foreign policy had affected progress. In countries which had shown a tremendous change in their foreign policies over the past 20 years, 90% of people felt that the departure from their traditional foreign policy had led their country to progress and prosperity. Only 27% of people from countries whose traditional foreign policy had remained static said the same. What this survey helps us understand, is how remaining static and sticking to tradition while dealing with countries on the international scale is no longer beneficial. As globalisation permeates its effects throughout the world, countries and their population diaspora are changing. Traditional allies are becoming weaker and can no longer be relied upon for economic or political support. Countries must abandon adherence to tradition on the international scale as this only impedes progress. A full judgement upon this will be explored in the final paragraph.
Taking all these factors into account, I am of the opinion that tradition impedes progress only if implemented mindlessly. A tradition had originally been created as a solution to deal with the particular situation at the time. However, as times rapidly change, people must contemplate upon the reason behind a particular tradition before implementing it to ensure their progress is not impeded.
Comments