THE MYTH OF CONVENTIONAL WISDOM AND GROWING OLD

It may have been Canadian-born Harvard economist John Kenneth Galbraith who coined the expression “Conventional wisdom.” It is really nothing more than a belief that enough people share to make it “conventional.” How it gets to be “wisdom” is the biggest mystery. All it is, is a large number of people agreeing about something.

I used to play the game of “duelling aphorisms.” I was led back to one of my favourites after reading an Op Ed piece by David Brooks in the New York Times about the rise of older people. It reminded me of my adages and homiletic “truths,” or to return to “conventional wisdom”: “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks” juxtaposed to “you’re never too old to learn.”Or perhaps “Nothing ventured nothing gained,” against only a fool does not “look before he leaps.”

It is of the slogans and aphorisms that we build a storehouse of common knowledge, or common sense, which is often common but not sensible. People tend to hide behind what we think are common truths. I’ll agree that we should agree that murder is bad and theft is unwelcome, but beyond that there is always room for discussion.

I watch with alarm the rise of “populism,” It is supposed to be an appeal to basic “truths” and again, “conventional wisdom.” Populism has become and perhaps always was, a form of demagoguery, an appeal to the most basic instinctive, often thoughtless beliefs. And it sells. It rallies people who want, not change, but reassurance. It reminds me of the old “Know Nothing” party of the 19th century.

So I take a deep breath, with David Brooks’ words about the wisdom of age echoing in my brain, and wonder at the herd mentality; the clamouring for the heads of anyone who the demogogues say is “threatening their way of life.” And so the “Tea Party” supporters clamour for the scalp of the man some of them so recently took to their hearts; the man who promised “change” and is now realizing that millions of people fear change and will fight to maintain the status quo.

Just to keep the record straight – I know that the opponents of Barack Obama hoped for something to rally around, and the Tea Party was their touchstone. Most of them did not vote for him. Most of them did not want change. Most of them subscribe to the rubbish about less government and at the same time clamour for government intervention, often in the form of no intervention, (try to square that contradiction) so that employment will rise, money will flow, and apple pie will once more be at the heart of American reality.

I feel for the millions of Americans who invested their passions and hopes in a transformative president. It’s almost like believing in Santa Claus. Few Americans (and Canadians are not free of this fault) really understand how their three levels of government work and that the executive is not all powerful.

But I carp. What I liked best perhaps about Brooks’ piece about older people is the recognition that many of us still do pursue goals and learn new things. He also repeated the old psychological saw about how, as we get older, our character does not change, but we become more of what we were. From that you can infer that if at 40 you were shy at 80 you will be a recluse. If at 40 you were adventurous at 80 you would be feckless.

But against all that is the reigning conventional knowledge that “age mellow you.” It hasn’t mellowed me. Just made my footstep a little slower. And new stuff? Bring it on.