TRADITION.

[Pumpkin_Man]

Hi Folks:

I was going through the "Halloween Tree" thread on the "Other Holiday's" message board, and I read MacPhantoms answer to my post about tradition. I didn't want to stray off topic, so I thought I would post my answer here.

I agree, that when people are being victimized, then there's a need for change. I do not, believe, that tyrany, such as slavery, womens rights and the unjust way the British Moncarchy treated the Colonists have anything to do with TRADITION. Slavery is NOT a TRADITION. It never was. Taxation without representation is NOT a TRADITION, and it never was. These tyranical practices are brought about by attitudes, and the mistaken belief that it's a TRADITION.

Yes, by all means. We need to change with the times in many aspects, but TRADITION is not a bad thing. A TRADITION, is something that is observed and practiced on a regular basis. Thanksgiving Dinner is a TRADITION. Trick or Treat is a TRADITION. Going to Mass on Sunday is a Tradition. The celebration of Pass Over is a TRADITION. These things do not harm others. The practice of discrimination based on <deleted>, race, or other reason is NOT a tradition. You are nog honoring anything by depriving women of the right to vote, or by over taxing your own people because they live in a colony 3000 miles away from the home country.

So the colonists did NOT break with TRADITION. Yes, I also agree that our constitution gave us the flexibility to grow and to address and resolve injustices such as slavery and <deleted> discrimination, BUT those injustices are NOT nor were they EVER TRADITIONS.

Mike

[MacPhantom]

Great idea to start a new topic to continue this interesting discussion, Mike! Thanks very much!

I agree, that when people are being victimized, then there's a need for change. I do not, believe, that tyrany, such as slavery, womens rights and the unjust way the British Moncarchy treated the Colonists have anything to do with TRADITION. Slavery is NOT a TRADITION. It never was. Taxation without representation is NOT a TRADITION, and it never was. These tyranical practices are brought about by attitudes, and the mistaken belief that it's a TRADITION.

Merriam-Webster defines tradition, among other ways, as "an inherited, established, or customary pattern of thought, action, or behavior" and "cultural continuity in social attitudes, customs, and institutions". There is no value judgment contained therein as to the goodness or badness of tradition. Tradition is not defined as only good attitudes, customs, actions, behaviors, or institutions, but merely any of those things that are passed on from generation to generation ("inherited"), or have some measure of cultural continuity. The institution of slavery, which was passed on through several generations before it was abolished, absolutely fits this definition. In fact, a major argument of secessionist states during the Civil War was that the abolishment of slavery was an interference in the customs and traditions of the south. The absolute power of a God-chosen monarch is another tradition that the founding fathers of our country decided was bad, and chose to discard it.

Traditions exist. We, as individuals or groups decide if they are good or bad, if we will follow them or discard them. Or, we can choose to follow them, without evaluating them, simply because they are "the way things have always been".

Take circumcision, for example. In the Jewish faith, male circumcision is a long standing tradition. In many Muslim countries, female circumcision is a long standing tradition. Now in America, most people find male circumcision to be acceptable, but female circumcision to be abhorrent. However you feel about either of the procedures is entirely subjective, but it is undeniable that both meet the definition of "tradition". Thus, I think we can agree that "good" is not part of the definition of "tradition", and that traditions can be both good and bad.

If we can agree that some traditions can be bad, we must agree that holding to traditions just because they are traditional can sometimes be bad.

Yes, by all means. We need to change with the times in many aspects, but TRADITION is not a bad thing.

As demonstrated above, tradition can be a good thing or a bad thing.

A TRADITION, is something that is observed and practiced on a regular basis.

If this is your definition of "tradition", it closely matches the Merriam-Webster definition, and my argument above works just as well. It is devoid of a value judgment (good or bad), and is in fact the carrying on of actions, customs, or ideas.

Thanksgiving Dinner is a TRADITION. Trick or Treat is a TRADITION. Going to Mass on Sunday is a Tradition. The celebration of Pass Over is a TRADITION. These things do not harm others.

Here you have listed several traditions you practice, evaluated them for their benefits to you or their detriments to others, and have found them fun, fulfilling, and harmless. You have deemed them "good traditions", and have decided to carry on with them. I am in agreement with you.

The practice of discrimination based on <deleted>, race, or other reason is NOT a tradition. You are nog honoring anything by depriving women of the right to vote, or by over taxing your own people because they live in a colony 3000 miles away from the home country.

Here you have listed several traditions you do not practice, because your evaluation of them deemed them harmful or bad. I agree with you that they should be discarded, but unfortunately they were in fact traditions, based on the definitions above. They were indeed customs, practices, actions, and behaviors that had a cultural continuity. Luckily, the opinions of people at large changed, and no longer found them acceptable, and discarded them. That is the crux of my argument. We should not do things because they are "tradition". We should evaluate them, decide if they are good or bad, and them continue them only if they are good.

Let's look at marriage. After the abolition of slavery, well into the 20th century, it was still illegal in most states for an inter-racial couple to marry. It was a tradition; marriage was only between a man and a woman of the same race. Luckily, the opinion of the population at large changed over time. The tradition of same race only marriage was re-evaluated and discarded. Currently, tradition holds that marriage is only between a man and a woman, but as the opinions of our society change over time, more and more of us find the tradition of denying marriage rights to same gender couples to be unacceptable. Eventually, enough people will agree, and gender discrimination in marriage rights will be abolished. Just as people argued that slavery was traditional, so some also argued that only same race marriage was traditional. Today, they argue that only one-man-one-woman marriage is traditional. But tradition for tradition's sake never survives the test of time. Freedom and fairness have a way of winning out.

Thanks again for this very interesting topic!

[adrian]

I decorated a tree last night thats a tradition

[MacPhantom]

I decorated a tree last night thats a tradition

And not a bad one, I'd say.....

[adrian]

i just wish i had finished decorating now i have to continue on tonight

[iHaunt]

Ok, why not let XMAS be XMAS? It's all in good fun to have a Halloween tree, but it's coller to have a real honest to goodness XMAS tree for XMAS time. Not everyone lives and breathes Halloween all year if you have other families and guests over.... they'd probably rather see a Christmas tree than seeing Halloween tree also would be more fun and interested, and less strange to them....

[Pumpkin_Man]

MacPhantom, you present a good argument, but I just can't see depriving other human beings of their basic God-given rights as traditional. Some may view it as such, but slavery, gender discrimination and other tyranical practices have never been a part of my life or traditional practices. Whe I think of TRADITION, (all caps,) I am thinking in terms of the practicds and observances that bring people together. Of course, there are TRADITIONS that I observe by myself as I do live alone. Most of the TRADITIONS I observe in regards to Halloween are like that. The reason why the "traditions" you mentioned, and I don't dispute the validity of your definition, were discarded, is because they drove people apart.

Are you familiar with the short story "The Lottery?" It was very popular when I was in high school, and I read it in my English Lit book as well as saw it on a short film. The "Readers Digest Condensed Version" of the story, is that it's about a town where every year they hold a lottery. Everyone participates, and the "winner" is stoned to death. It was done, because it was a their "tradition." Well, TRADITION builds character. TRADITION is good for people, and if some one dies because of it's practice, then as far as I'm concerned, it's not a TRADITION at all. I, personaly would never partake of a lottery where I could be stoned to death. But I will be at Mass next Sunday. I will be carving jack o'lanterns next October, and I will be putting my Advent Wreath together this Saturday so it will be ready for the 1st Sunday of Advent. That's real TRADITION.

Mike

[Andybev01]

The Lottery is one of the most terrifying little stories ever penned.
Shirley Jackson was running from some pretty powerful demons, I must say!

[Pumpkin_Man]

Shirley Jackson saw a lot of traditions as evil, dark and vile. In the event that any community would have alottery every year to sacrofice a human being, then it would be a vile tradition that should be abandoned. The way I look at TRADITION, is that it's supposed to bring people closer together, not tear them apart or destroy one person for the entertainment of the many. Any sall called "tradition" that does harm is not really a tradtion at all IMHO.

On the flip side of that coin, change just for the sake of change can be every bit as bad. One of the ways that tyranical governments opress certain groups of people was to attack their culture and their traditions. Hitler made laws against Kosher butchering, and the celebration of Hanukah, Pass Over and various other Jewish traditions. The ancient Babolonians also opressed the Jewish people by trying to force them to worship their peagan dieties and abandoned their tradiitons. The British Royals opressed the people of Ireland by forbidding them to practice their relition and speak their languages. The Communists of Russia and China viewed all old traditions as "subversive" or "counter revolutionary." In fract, I would go as far as to say that forcing unwanted changes on entire groups of people is even worse then refusing to make any changes at all.

Let's take a look at the following scenario. A foreign country becomes very powerful. Even more powerful then the United States. They realize that, and they invade the U.S. They take over the entire country and all it's possessions. The first thing to go is our Constitution. We no longer have the Bill of Rights. For that reason, any celebration of the 4th of July would be strictly prohibited. Next to go would be our celebration of Thanksgiving, because if we are goig to be "proper subjects" to this new country that has taken us over, we can't hold on to this sentimental, idiotic tradition of giving thanks on the 4th Thursday of Thanksgiving. They might let us keep Christmas, but we would probably have to tone down Halloween. Trick or Treat would be too "American" for the new regeim, so it would have to stop. If the new regiem were athiest by nature, then Sunday Mass, or service, or any other religious service would have to go as well. And while they may let us keep Christmas, we wold probably have to change it to the "Winter" holiday, or the "Solstice" holiday as it's too "American" to believe in God and celebrate Christmas or Hanukah. A huge portion of my record and CD collection would very likely end up on the baned list.

The above is the evil of forcing unwanted change on a whole country.

Mike

[Murfreesboro]

Oh, interesting discussion. Mike, in general, I am similar to you in the positive connotations the word "tradition" holds for me. However, I have to concede that McPhantom is strictly right--traditions can be good or bad. The Shirley Jackson story is a fine example of a negative tradition, although the concept of a "scapegoat" has a very long religious history and culminates in Jesus's death on the cross. (In fact, it has been my understanding that Jesus's death is the reason we no longer condone ritual sacrifice of people or animals in the West.)

McPhantom is right that slavery was often defended as the South's "peculiar institution," in effect, granting it special status as a cultural tradition. (I've been doing a lot of reading about American history this year, though, and I have learned that the North collaborated in the continuation of slavery by selling their unwanted slaves south, rather than freeing them on the spot. The continuation of this "tradition" wasn't altogether the South's fault, and the abolition of slavery wasn't altogether due to the uprightness of the North. Lots of economic motives in there, and racism was prevalent on both sides during the Civil War.)

On the whole, though, I believe there is much to be said for tradition as a way of communicating values across generations, and of creating psychological stability for all of us in this world of flux. Change for the sake of change is every bit as bad as clinging blindly to tradition. In fact, I think people need to be very careful about the kind of change they invite into their lives. One advantage of traditions is that they have been proven to work, at least. And the traditions surrounding our holidays often endow the world with a beauty we might otherwise miss.

[MacPhantom]

Hi Mike!

I don't think we're arguing from opposite sides of the spectrum here; I think we just have a different operational definition of tradition. For you, "tradition", or TRADITION has only a positive connotation, whereas for me it is a neutral term. For you, the value judgment comes first; if you decide something is bad, it is necessarily excluded from your definition of tradition. For me, the value judgment comes after; first, a practice is deemed a tradition based on a dictionary definition, and then it is evaluated for positive or negative effects. Your citing of Shirley Jackson's The Lottery is a perfect example of my argument. The practice of the townspeople meets the dictionary definition of tradition, but when we evaluate it to gauge its effects, our morality and ethics deem it to be a bad tradition.

I, personaly would never partake of a lottery where I could be stoned to death. But I will be at Mass next Sunday. I will be carving jack o'lanterns next October, and I will be putting my Advent Wreath together this Saturday so it will be ready for the 1st Sunday of Advent. That's real TRADITION.

You call it "real" tradition, but it would more accurately be described as "good" tradition, or at least "good" according to your code of ethics and your set of beliefs.

Any sall called "tradition" that does harm is not really a tradtion at all IMHO.

We are having a classic semantic debate. You have a very personalized, narrow definition of tradition, while I accept the broader dictionary definition.

On the flip side of that coin, change just for the sake of change can be every bit as bad.

Yes it certainly can be; and change for the sake of oppression, such as in the examples you cite, is even worse. But the hypothetical example you posit, in which foreign nations invade the United States, subjugate the population and abolish many of the traditions you personally hold dear, only serves to highlight the fact that such a scenario already occurred in America. In fact, the theft of land and destruction of the traditions of the indigenous peoples of America was a prerequisite to the establishment of the United States of America. Now, I don't want to re-litigate the origins of our country. No one alive today is responsible for the atrocities that happened centuries ago. We should not discount the truly great things about our country because of some of the truly awful things that happened in the past. But we should absolutely try to keep perspective when discussing tradition, which is the passing down of culture and practices, sometimes from our ancestors who WERE responsible for those past evils.

Murfreesboro, your study of the American Civil War has lent great insight to this discussion, and you're exactly right; to simplify and blame the South exclusively for slavery would be a gross distortion of history, as would blaming the entire conflict on slavery alone. And I agree with your assessments both on the value of tradition and the risk of change for the sake of change.

[DemonSlayerMau]

I would like to note that I think there are many good and harmless traditions that need not be replaced, while new traditions don't necessarily harm anything either.
No one's forcing anyone to have a fake tree at christmas time, and having a real one is definitely a traditional thing for many people. But for me, getting the same tree that's been used for several years out of the basement or storage IS a beloved tradition. Putting it together is just as exciting as putting the decorations on it. Using a fake tree that was passed on from generation to generation is a beloved tradition. The only thing that's different is that you aren't killing and wasting a living tree and having to dispose of it every year.
I'm not saying that having a real tree isn't a beloved tradition either, but you can't say that a fake one isn't tradition for others. One thing you could do to keep the tradition without wasting a tree, is getting a potted tree, and start a new tradition of planting one each spring.
I bring this up because I know Pumpkin man makes a big deal about the traditional christmas, but I think he also forgets that some people have different traditions than others, and I'd like to point out that just because someone has a different tradition doesn't mean that in itself is a bad thing. You can still practice your traditions, and I can practice mine. Sometimes new traditions can be integrated into the old tradition...like my example of getting a potted tree. Still the real deal, except this time you can have a new tradition of planting it and bringing life to a new tree.
I'm one who likes to compromise.
There are, as MacPhantom pointed out, bad traditions. It doesn't mean it's not a tradition, but it's still a tradition. I remember in the book Princess, which goes along with what was pointed out about female circumcision, that the mother in the story saw many traditions that the father and son were doing. Unfortunately, the only tradition there was for women was that awful female genital mutilation. She would have her daughters undergo that "tradition" until a Doctor pointed out that it was bad for them to do this. If I were to specify why exactly the muslims do this, I'm afraid it would be too inappropriate for this forum. All I'm going to say is that it is a sign of female oppression and making them to be nothing more than an object of pleasure for a man, and that a woman isn't allowed to have any true joy.
Traditionally in the muslim's culture, a woman's only purpose is to bear sons and please a man. That's it.
In fact, traditionally it was a beautiful thing and a blessing to have a son, and a curse to have a daughter! How awful! This is even true of the Old Testament in the Bible.
But I can't put the blame entirely on Christianity, Islam and Judiasm. After all, I believe in the same God as the Christians and Jews, but I'm not that religious. The Chinese and Eastern Countries also hold the importance of having a son, to the point where when they made the law that you could only have ONE child, if a daughter was born she was likely killed or sent to an orphanage to be starved to death.
This has caused a major problem in China, because now there is a shortage of women in china. Imagine that! Traditionally women are held with less importance than men. Do you think this is a good tradition? Absolutely not! This only diminishes the hope of being able to get married and raise a family, and the family is a central part of Chinese culture which they were robbed of when Communism took them over.
In fact, the family is an important aspect of every almost every culture, and is a beautiful tradition. But it doesn't mean it's for everyone. I don't ever plan on having children. But that doesn't mean I won't have a family either. :p Forcing a woman to do something she doesn't want to do is just plain wrong, but often times that in itself, controlling the rights of women, is a tradition.
Personally, while I don't plan on ever have children, if I did I would find it a great blessing to have a daughter. I'm rebellious that way, if I had to have a child I would want it to be a little girl because I'm tired of the high emphasis that is placed on the importance of men, and lack of importance in women. Even in the Bible people forget that Husbands must love their wives and be willing to give their lives for them, but don't stop for a second to bark the whole "Wives submit to your husbands" when in reality, I really think that men and women are equal in the eyes of God, and each one important and special. Otherwise, God wouldn't have made woman. Women are meant to be the partners of men, not slaves. When I think partnership, I think equality.

Sorry for my rant. By the way, you don't need to say tradition in all caps either. I think we get the point. :p

[adrian]

i ate thanksgiving with the mum this thursday thats one of my traditions

[Murfreesboro]

I've never felt that Christianity necessarily preaches the subjugation of women, despite two or three passages in St. Paul (which, as you rightly observe, DemonSlayerMau, also enjoin certain obligations on men). Instead, I look at examples such as Jesus's saving the woman taken in adultery, and his choosing to show himself to Mary Magdalene as the first witness of his Resurrection (this at a time when women were not admitted as witnesses in courts of law). To me, that shows the very high value Jesus places on women. It seems to me also that women enjoy the most liberties today in nations that were traditionally Christian, even though many Western societies might more properly be described as post-Christian now.

I have two sons and a daughter, and I cherish each of them uniquely. But I must say that I was very anxious to have a girl! I think that's just a gender thing. Most men want sons, and most women want daughters. You have a different kind of companionship from a member of your own gender, I think. I feel very blessed to have both, though. I think it is one of the worst features of Chinese Communiism that they have dictated how many children each couple is allowed to have.

[Spookymufu]

I have two sons and a daughter, and I cherish each of them uniquely. But I must say that I was very anxious to have a girl! I think that's just a gender thing. Most men want sons, and most women want daughters. You have a different kind of companionship from a member of your own gender, I think. I feel very blessed to have both, though. I think it is one of the worst features of Chinese Communism that they have dictated how many children each couple is allowed to have.

I had a son first, then we tried for and got a girl, my daughter is the hardest to deal with out of all our kids. I dont know what happened in the "cooking" process but for some reason my daughter is a tough nut to crack. We also have 3 boys and they are completely opposite in their attitudes.
I'm not so sure the Chinese have it all together wrong with the selective child birth thing, I have seen a lot of people in this country (US) that have too many kids they cant take care of, kids they shouldnt take care of, and too many people asking the Gov to help with their kids they cant take care of......maybe there is a middle ground.