Change is never easy. I admit that change is never easy for me or always my first choice; however I have come to learn that change happens in life. If you do not accept the constant change evolution brings or try to adapt to it you will only become a bitter and lonely person always looking to the past for happiness but never finding fulfillment. Some say change is not good because it messes up what is going well while others say change is great because it brings variety to life. No one can say for sure whether change will be good or bad (unless they have a crystal ball).
Change will happen no matter if people are angry, excited, inviting or against it. Change is the only thing that has allowed evolution to work. So the most important thing about change, is the reaction to it. People can either accept or reject the change. The reaction should be based on knowledge and feeling so that an intuitive yet educated decision can be made. Going by education alone is nonhuman while going by feeling alone is illogical.
I bring this topic up because there has been a lot of debate about minor changes to a committee I am on. Some people do not want to change because they see it as an encroachment on their tradition. These people have been doing things the same way for many years. Others see no problem with the change as it may be bring in new experiences. So who is right?
I think the only way people will know if the change will be good or bad is to try it out. If the change is no good then change back to what was being done. If the change is good then keep with it. People will never know unless they try it. It is like trying spinach for the first time. Some people love it and keep eating it and some people hate it and never eat it again. These may be some extreme examples but think about what would have happened if instead of formulating intuitive yet educated reactions, if people would have rejected change before even starting.
Giving equal rights to people of all races
Giving equal rights to all genders
Increasing the legal drinking age
Accepting that the world is round
Seeking cleaner sources of energy
People cannot be afraid of change, instead they must learn how to handle it/react to it properly. If everyone would have have been scared of the above changes or reacted negatively would the world be better off?
What is the worst thing that change can bring? If change happens and it is not as good, we can change again to make it better. If change happens and it goes well, then we are all better off.
2 comments:
You’re running a pretty interesting blog there Dorothy so I’ll bite and join in the fun and give economic perspective on this (econ is my major). The best thing about economics is that you can narrow almost anything in life to a situation of cost vs. benefit, expectations, and unintended consequences.
First, you should keep in mind how change is brought about – willingly (under personal control) or unwillingly (or by factors we cannot control alone). If person willingly changes, then that person acted on the expectation that the change will bring him a greater benefit than costs. A person can also willingly oppose a change, in other words, he/she is expecting greater costs than benefits as a result.
In your first paragraph, what you refer to as “constant/evolutionary change” I would call the unwilling/beyond our controll change. Some examples could include natural disasters, war, or technology. I can even give a personal example of when I moved to US: it was my parent’s decision, not my own. In such events, change still comes down to costs and benefits. Surely I could have resisted my parent’s will and stay in Poland … alone. So what you see happening in this type of change is simply the fact that the cost of not changing is HUGE (in my example it would cost me the ability to be with my family, education, + I would have to support myself etc. so I, of course… adjusted.
Moving on… I will disagree when you say this “If you do not accept the constant change evolution brings or try to adapt to it you will only become a bitter and lonely person always looking to the past for happiness but never finding fulfillment.” Here’s an example why. My grandfather reads a newspaper everyday. He buys it from the store and he’s happy about it. I asked him if he would consider of using a computer and the internet to have access to all kinds of news sources that are not at his disposal atm. He doesn’t want it. Why not? Well it’s cost and benefit again. The benefit is… well the internet (get info faster, many options, etc.) … and the cost? Well he would have to learn how to use a computer and how to get the desired information from the websites – all of which takes time, as you get older, you have less time, so time becomes scarcer, and if something is scarce it’s expensive. That’s why an older person would much rather spend his time on more valuable things in life like being with their grandkids. A young person would certainly consider using the internet because they have lots of time left so over their lifespan it would “payoff” to learn how to use a computer.
I also disagree when you say this “I think the only way people will know if the change will be good or bad is to try it out.” “If change happens and it is not as good, we can change again to make it better I disagree because we can look to the past and see what kind of results this change brought on if it was tried in similar environment. And remember, positive intentions do not equate to positive results. “Road to hell is paved with good intentions” hehe.
Also, changing back may not be as easy as it sounds. If you implement a negative change and then change back it’s just a cost in energy in time. So it would be fooling not to look at history and see if that change worked (or why it didn’t work) and it would be foolish trying not to avoid those costs.
Jeez, this got longer than I expected. I’ll get to the point. ( I reached character post limit)
Seemed to me that you were arguing for people to accept change for the sake of change, and described the other side as people who do not want to change for the sake of not changing or because they are content with what they’ve got. I’m just saying that it’s all a matter of personal cost/benefits and expectations and it’s best to try and identify those costs and benefits (not easy to do)
Trying new things may bring a benefit of it’s own to but I don’t see a problem with those who are simply content with what they got. I actually think the latter is much more admirable because when taken to the extreme…. if you can be content with having nothing then everything else is just gravy =)
Good luck with the changes in the committee. If you haven’t done so yet (which I doubt) make a list of costs and benefits that change might bring. Argue for the benefits, against the costs, and if possible, find an example of where the change has already worked in this or similar situation.
Again Good luck.!
Post a Comment