The technique asserts that the value or correctness of a practice or policy stems solely from it being in place for a long time. By emphasizing the perceived stability and inherent value of tradition, it often frames change as not only unnecessary but potentially dangerous, suggesting that abandoning tradition could lead to harmful or irreversible consequences.
Appeal to Tradition leverages the psychological comfort of familiarity and the human tendency to associate longevity with legitimacy. This is reinforced by the mere exposure effect
- the psychological phenomenon where repeated exposure to a stimulus increases an individual’s preference for it.
, where what is familiar feels more appealing because the unknown often evokes discomfort or even fear. It is further amplified by status quo bias - the cognitive tendency to prefer the current state of affairs and resist changes, even when those changes might be beneficial.
, which causes people to perceive the current state as safer or more reliable than potential alternatives, even when evidence to the contrary is lacking.
Additionally, this technique often taps into emotional reasoning - a cognitive distortion in which a person concludes that their emotional reaction to something reflects its objective reality.
by linking traditions to cherished memories and cultural identity. Longstanding practices can evoke feelings of security and continuity, making audiences reluctant to question or abandon them, even if they have outlived their usefulness.
Speakers using this technique often highlight the risks of abandoning traditional practices, framing such changes as unnecessary and potentially harmful. For example, the anti-woke movement frequently invokes Appeal to Tradition when positioning itself as a defender of "traditional values."
Opponents of "woke" initiatives—such as diversity programs, gender-neutral language, or systemic reforms—often argue that these changes are problematic because they deviate from long-standing cultural norms, practices, or values. Similarly, efforts to resist renaming institutions, removing statues, or revising curriculums appeal to preserving long-standing practices, suggesting that abandoning these traditions would show disrespect for history or destabilize the values that have held society together.
Countering Appeal to Tradition can be challenging because it often involves questioning deeply held beliefs or practices tied to cultural identity. Critics risk being perceived as disrespectful or reckless for questioning traditions, even when they present compelling evidence for the benefits of change.
Additionally, the technique plays on fear of the unknown, making it harder for critics to gain support for alternatives. By presenting change as a potential risk, Appeal to Tradition fosters an emotional resistance that logical arguments often fail to overcome. The weight of tradition and the comfort it provides can overshadow even the most rational and evidence-based critiques.
To recognize Appeal to Tradition, look for arguments that rely on the longevity or established nature of a practice as the primary justification for maintaining it.
Ask yourself: Does the argument provide practical, evidence-based reasons for upholding the tradition, or does it rely on vague implications of risk, harm, or disrespect associated with change? By examining the evidence and separating emotional appeals from logical reasoning, you can evaluate whether the argument stands on its own merit or is simply evoking a fear of the unknown.
