On Dec 4, 2003, at 17:02 , Gomi no Sensei wrote: > On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Matthew Hunter wrote: >> In other words, tradition cumulative result of the prior >> generations saying "This is what we did, and it worked." > > Precisely so. Actually, IMO, not. It's more like "this is what we did, and it more-or-less worked out the way that it did, which may or may not have been all that great, depending on who you listen to". I, myself, would love to see a disclaimer added to that statement (which nobody ever does, maybe because they aren't sticklers for accuracy like I try/tend to be): "Please note that doing the same thing at whatever time it is that you're going to do it may or may not yield the same results on account of the whole rest of the situation having inevitably changed >from how it was when we attempted what we did, and in fact, maybe BECAUSE OF what we attempted. In other words, your milage may vary (widely)." The problem with tradition, is that small changes in the situation make big differences in the appropriateness of any given course of action. Most people who adhere to tradition, for tradition's sake, tend to ignore even big differences in situations. One example: people who argue against the "modernization" of Shakespeare's works (setting "Romeo & Juliet" in modern society, etc.) because it's a change from the original works, independently of the quality of the implementation of the change (be it bad or good). -- Matthew S. Klahn Software Architect, CodeTek Studios, Inc. http://www.codetek.com