Conservatives maintain a perennial dilemma: when reason and tradition become incompatible with one another, which should one follow? At first, G. K. Chesterton’s parable of the fence appears to provide a sufficient solution. “Go away and think,” he commands. Only once reason has been consulted—rather, grappled with—can appropriate action be taken over the tradition. However, his metaphor does not address the potential conflict that may arise between competing forms of reason. What happens when the man who goes away to think returns with reasons to destroy a tradition, while the man who stays behind orders him to keep it in place? This debate will attempt to answer whether the first man—the heretic—or the second man—the dogmatist—should be adhered to in matters ranging from politics and culture to religion and philosophy.
The affirmative believes it is paramount for a flourishing society to constantly question its own practices, beliefs, and traditions. Heresy intends to hold societes committing injustice accountable for their actions in the hope that, through intellectual attacks, they may update their customs to adhere to a higher truth. While not going so far as Thomas Jefferson to say that every twenty years requires a revolution, the affirmative supports thought, reason, and skepticism as foundational components of a life well-lived. Indeed, when Socrates said that the unexamined life was not worth living, he meant it: believing any truths to be unquestionable, as dogmatists do, reveals a stiflingly large intellectual pride. In the end, it is better to humble ourselves not before the god of tradition, but before the god of truth.
The negative rejects the label of “proud” and turns it back on the affirmative itself. It is far more prideful and ignorant to claim that, in the long train of human consciousness, you alone are the first person to think of an objection to a social custom. While a very select few of exemplary radicals have changed society for the better, the majority of them have befallen one of two fates: notoriety or obscurity. Dogma, not heresy, allows people to truly flourish by freeing them from the constant reexamination of preferences and conceptions. By ensuring social stability and a belief in objective truth, those in the negative appeal to the typical conservative sensibility of Burke’s “dignified obedience.” It is paramount to accept certain truths, whether they be political, cultural, or religious, with unquestioning support and faithful adherence.
Are conservatives today dogmatists or heretics? Can one be both in different contexts? And does society function because of yesterday’s workers or today’s dreamers?
