Originally posted by seacapt Norm , the only way I can answer is this. There are both good and bad aspects of both new and old ways. Wisdom is knowing which method works best for a given situation. To simply abandon the old for the new foolish.
Let me use a wood working analogy to illustrate. If I wanted to join 2 boards which is better , to use a bisquit joiner or to cut and glue a scarf joint? Correct answer- it depends on the application. I'm not a cabinet maker but have build a wooden boat or two. Personally I for the most part prefer to use traditional techniques and tools but supliment them with the new.I also realize a wise craftsman will admit error and learn from mistakes.
In modern fiberglass boat building I can assure you that some of the most "inovative" factories today are building some of the biggest pieces of crap on the water.
Well, a lot of 'modern' things aren't *designed* to be better: they're 'designed' to be more *profitable.* Big difference.
But, interestingly, you don't have to look around too many of my posts about photography, etc, to realize this is one place where ol' RML is *rather conservative indeed:* Tools and machines and stuff like that. (We seem to have that in common, both of us shooting Canon F-1s and all.
) Not that I'm not also fascinated by new ideas and machines and can recognize when something new actually works better, whether I actually want it or not.
And, actually, what used to be the best way to do something in woodworking for instance, isn't just 'tried and true therefore better' cause we might like the idea: actually those old ways are also products of old *limitations* in materials and technologies and other stuff like that.
(There's also the fact that having largely lacked access to a nice biscuit joiner, well, you've got to emply other means anyway. )
But interestingly, the 'conservative mindset' has become one where any deviation from "More profit=better" is considered some 'commie librul notion' ...ie, the outsiders competing, etc.
(As for previous talk about 'Neanderthal genes making people dumber,' (as in 'more primitive/instinctive=dumber,) ...I don't think so, actually. I think that's a pile of prejudices to be making assumptions about
: also if you're theorizing from relative brain structures, there's a big problem: namely, that whatever those Neanderthal genes do, they *don't* seem to express in the brain structures of modern humans on that kind of macro scale. )
When it comes to physical practicalities, though, perhaps that's a different sort of 'conservatism.'