Can we really embrace change?
The conservatives are fools: They whine about the decay of traditional values, yet they enthusiastically support technological process and economic growth. Apparently it never occurs to them that you can’t make rapid, drastic changes in the technology and the economy of a society without causing rapid changes in all other aspects of the society as well, and that such rapid changes inevitably break down traditional values…
-UNABOMBER manifesto *
Can we truly embrace change? Personally, I have always been a little reticent about changes but I am not against it at all. Ever.
Of late, I’m aware that self-restraints that used to constrict my view of change has been somewhat eroded. Growing up, I was always ambivalent towards change…and that has not changed. Instead, my reception towards change is a lot more warm and forthcoming.
Is progress always about change? The just-concluded American President elections, the March 2008 general election in Malaysia, the general direction of my life… all these seem to indicate that change is a sign of moving times but need not necessarily indicate progress. The theory of evolution seems to suggest that change indeed allows a species to continuously thrive by keeping or developing the traits necessary to enable it cope with the changing landscape, weather et al. The election of the first (half)black President of the USA seems to indicate that its people are ready to break the stereotypical white male president mould. The less-than-stellar victory of the BN government in the general elections is March may herald a long-awaited shadow government to keep the ruling coalition in check.
Whatever the causes of these circumstances, their effects show that change is somewhat universal and in a rippling sort-of way affects us all.
Yet, it may be that we hope that the change is indicative of progress. Would it be progress if we have evolved into 4 feet tall beings with really short feet (we need not walk much, if any) and really long fingers (for all the fancy gadgets) and a really large head (as brain and not brawn is highlight of the day). Aesthetics aside, I do not think I can bear the though if we do indeed evolve into something like that. Similarly, is a non-comforming leader or government necessarily better than one that fits the stereotype? I would like to think not.
Dare I call conservatives fools? No. Dare I ask them to embrace change? I would say, give it a try. Arguments that we should not change something that is not broken has been used oft-enough and may I perhaps suggest that even though something is not broken, we can still try to improve it, no? Maybe giving it new coat of paint? Or adding another thingamajig for easier handling? Or downsizing to increase efficiency?
A.N. Whitehead puts it aptly when he said that ‘the art of progress is to preserve order amid change.’ So yes, let us all not be afraid of change. Keep old values if you must, but at the same time at least allow for some new ones to come in. An open mind sees a thing for what it is, a closed one sees for what it wants or fears it should be.
*page 188 of Unabomber : A Desire To Kill.
-UNABOMBER manifesto *
Can we truly embrace change? Personally, I have always been a little reticent about changes but I am not against it at all. Ever.
Of late, I’m aware that self-restraints that used to constrict my view of change has been somewhat eroded. Growing up, I was always ambivalent towards change…and that has not changed. Instead, my reception towards change is a lot more warm and forthcoming.
Is progress always about change? The just-concluded American President elections, the March 2008 general election in Malaysia, the general direction of my life… all these seem to indicate that change is a sign of moving times but need not necessarily indicate progress. The theory of evolution seems to suggest that change indeed allows a species to continuously thrive by keeping or developing the traits necessary to enable it cope with the changing landscape, weather et al. The election of the first (half)black President of the USA seems to indicate that its people are ready to break the stereotypical white male president mould. The less-than-stellar victory of the BN government in the general elections is March may herald a long-awaited shadow government to keep the ruling coalition in check.
Whatever the causes of these circumstances, their effects show that change is somewhat universal and in a rippling sort-of way affects us all.
Yet, it may be that we hope that the change is indicative of progress. Would it be progress if we have evolved into 4 feet tall beings with really short feet (we need not walk much, if any) and really long fingers (for all the fancy gadgets) and a really large head (as brain and not brawn is highlight of the day). Aesthetics aside, I do not think I can bear the though if we do indeed evolve into something like that. Similarly, is a non-comforming leader or government necessarily better than one that fits the stereotype? I would like to think not.
Dare I call conservatives fools? No. Dare I ask them to embrace change? I would say, give it a try. Arguments that we should not change something that is not broken has been used oft-enough and may I perhaps suggest that even though something is not broken, we can still try to improve it, no? Maybe giving it new coat of paint? Or adding another thingamajig for easier handling? Or downsizing to increase efficiency?
A.N. Whitehead puts it aptly when he said that ‘the art of progress is to preserve order amid change.’ So yes, let us all not be afraid of change. Keep old values if you must, but at the same time at least allow for some new ones to come in. An open mind sees a thing for what it is, a closed one sees for what it wants or fears it should be.
*page 188 of Unabomber : A Desire To Kill.
