No system of certainty remains solitary for long.
Sooner or later, someone notices its limitations.
This observation generally marks the beginning of a new certainty.
The process is remarkably dependable.
An established community develops accepted doctrines.
Questions gradually become answers.
Answers become traditions.
Traditions become institutions.
Institutions become increasingly confident.
At this point, one or more individuals begin asking awkward questions.
The community initially regards these questions as misunderstandings.
Later, as persistence increases, they are reclassified as challenges.
Eventually they become heresy.
The transition from curiosity to heresy appears to depend less upon the content of the question than upon the enthusiasm with which it continues being asked.
The anthropologist has observed that heretics display several recurring characteristics.
They insist that everyone else has overlooked something obvious.
They describe existing institutions as complacent.
They employ phrases such as "fundamental rethink," "paradigm shift," and "what nobody is talking about."
Most intriguingly, they exhibit complete confidence that they themselves have escaped the psychological habits responsible for previous certainties.
This conviction has proved unusually durable.
Established authorities respond in equally predictable ways.
Initially, they ignore the dissenter.
Subsequently, they invite the dissenter to a symposium.
Later still, they establish a working group to examine the dissenter's concerns.
Finally, they cite the dissenter in future publications.
At this stage the heresy has generally become respectable.
Within another generation, it begins producing its own dissenters.
The cycle recommences with admirable punctuality.
Researchers once attempted to distinguish orthodox communities from revolutionary ones.
The project encountered unexpected difficulties.
Both groups organised conferences.
Both produced manifestos.
Both established specialist vocabularies.
Both explained why history had reached a decisive turning point.
Both regarded themselves as unusually courageous.
The principal difference appeared to concern seating arrangements.
One particularly elegant adaptation deserves mention.
Human beings rarely abandon previous certainty without first constructing a narrative explaining why the transition was inevitable.
This narrative serves several useful functions.
It preserves dignity.
It demonstrates progress.
Most importantly, it reassures participants that the current certainty differs fundamentally from all previous certainties.
Evidence supporting this conclusion remains under active review.
The anthropologist has repeatedly encountered individuals who proudly announce that they reject all orthodoxies.
This declaration is often made in the presence of like-minded colleagues.
Regular meetings are subsequently arranged.
The resulting organisation develops shared principles.
These are carefully distinguished from orthodox doctrine.
Members express considerable satisfaction regarding the distinction.
The distinction itself remains difficult to observe from outside the group.
This should not be regarded as failure.
It illustrates one of the species' more creative adaptations.
Humans appear capable of institutionalising almost any form of disagreement.
Even anti-institutional movements frequently develop constitutions.
Perhaps the most revealing observation concerns memory.
Each generation believes it has inherited an unusually stubborn establishment.
It also believes its own critique possesses unprecedented originality.
Both beliefs appear sincerely held.
Neither has noticeably interrupted the cycle.
The anthropologist therefore proposes a modest hypothesis.
The enduring opposition in human societies is not between orthodoxy and heresy.
It is between yesterday's certainty and tomorrow's.
The participants merely change places.
Field Note 13:
Human beings display an extraordinary capacity to rebel against institutions by founding new institutions.
Field Note 14:
Every successful heresy eventually acquires traditions requiring protection from subsequent heresies.
Field Note 15:
Participants consistently describe their certainty as a liberation from certainty.
No comments:
Post a Comment