ABSTRACT

The question that this paper seeks to answer is that of whether the resistance to change that characterizes the conservative temperament has any rational basis. More precisely, my question is whether we have good grounds for accepting any version of the principle that if something exists then we need a reason to change it but don’t need a reason to keep it. The paper defends a version of this principle whose scope is restricted to familiar traditions and customs on the one hand, and aging artifactual objects (houses, cars, toasters, and the like) on the other. The argument for that principle is that our current traditions and artifacts stand in various relations to the purposive activities of past agents—a different relation in each case—that give rise to presumptive but easily overridden reasons for their preservation.

摘要

本文试图回答的问题是，以保守气质为特征的对变革的抵制是否有任何合理的基础。更准确地说，我的问题是我们是否有充分的理由接受任何版本的原则，即如果某物存在，那么我们需要一个理由来改变它，而不需要一个理由来保留它。这篇论文捍卫了这一原则的一个版本，其范围一方面限于熟悉的传统和习俗，另一方面是老化的人造物品（房屋、汽车、烤面包机等）。支持这一原则的论据是，我们当前的传统和人工制品与过去代理人的有目的的活动存在着各种关系——每种情况下的关系都不同——这导致了对它们的保存的推定但很容易被推翻的理由。