"Tradition" seems to have a negative connotation to many. I'll define it simply as something that has been generationally handed do own. "Old" is bad and "new" is good seems a short-sighted way of looking at things.
Is an e-mail or texting better than actually speaking in real time, or a letter written in cursive just because it's a newer method of communication? Or how about navigating a customer service phone menu requiring listening to five or six options only to arrive where a similar choice is called for, and then still another list of possible options? I remember when a live person always answered and immediately put you through to the person you needed. I like traditional ethnic food better than the more expensive "fusion" versions. New ways are not necessarily better than old.
Traditional music (classical, Japanese folk, the sixties - among my favorites) can be said by many to be superior to most modern music. Does the fact that DaVinci, Monet, or Rembrandt painted centuries ago mean their art has less technique or less emotive power than recent artists? Others may say that contemporary styles can do the same, but does that make them better, or just different?
Doing something in a traditional way just because it's traditional is not effective (though it may bring comfort). But many traditions persist because they work or offer something useful. That's why they have survived over the years. If they don't seem to be beneficial, perhaps over time some of their principles have been lost or altered.
Tradition is a link to the past and understanding that has value for the present. My conclusion: Be open minded and objective after the tradition is fully understood. Don't be bound by it, but also, don't be dismissive of it. Changes to it may make it better, and sometimes not.
