Editing Tradition (section)

==Relationship to other concepts==
In the social sciences, ''tradition'' is often contrasted with ''modernity'', particularly in terms of whole societies. This dichotomy is generally associated with a linear model of social change, in which societies progress from being traditional to being modern.<ref name="Gusfield">{{Cite journal
| issn = 0002-9602
| volume = 72
| issue = 4
| pages = 351–362
| last = Gusfield
| first = Joseph R.
| title = Tradition and Modernity: Misplaced Polarities in the Study of Social Change
| journal = The American Journal of Sociology
| date = 1 January 1967
| jstor=2775860
| doi = 10.1086/224334
| pmid = 6071952
| s2cid = 8013111
}}</ref> Tradition-oriented societies have been characterized as valuing [[filial piety]], harmony and group welfare, stability, and [[interdependence]], while a society exhibiting modernity would value "individualism (with free will and choice), mobility, and progress."<ref name="Bronner">Bronner, Simon J. "Tradition" in ''International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences''. Ed. William A. Darity, Jr.. Vol. 8. 2nd ed. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2008. p420-422.</ref> Another author discussing tradition in relationship to modernity, Anthony Giddens, sees tradition as something bound to ritual, where ritual guarantees the continuation of tradition.<ref name = Giddens>Giddens, "Living in a Post-Traditional Society" 64</ref> Gusfield and others, though, criticize this dichotomy as oversimplified, arguing that tradition is dynamic, heterogeneous, and coexists successfully with modernity even within individuals.<ref name="Gusfield"/>

Tradition should be differentiated from ''customs, [[Convention (norm)|conventions]], laws, [[Norm (sociology)|norms]], routines, rules'' and similar concepts. Whereas tradition is supposed to be invariable, they are seen as more flexible and subject to innovation and change.<ref name="Green1997"/><ref name="HobsbawmRanger-2-3"/> Whereas justification for tradition is [[ideology|ideological]], the justification for other similar concepts is more practical or technical.<ref name="HobsbawmRanger-3-4">Hobsbawm [https://books.google.com/books?id=sfvnNdVY3KIC&pg=PA3 3–4]</ref> Over time, customs, routines, conventions, rules and such can evolve into traditions, but that usually requires that they stop having (primarily) a practical purpose.<ref name="HobsbawmRanger-3-4"/> For example, wigs worn by lawyers were at first common and fashionable; [[spur]]s worn by military officials were at first practical but now are both impractical and traditional.<ref name="HobsbawmRanger-3-4"/>