> [tradition] tends to be a collection of things whose primary commendation is that they didn't immediately cause a society to fail.
Not at all. Traditions become traditions over long periods of time. Thus, they tend to be collections of things that haven't caused a societal failure in the last several hundred years, which is a much better record than not causing immediate failure.
I have a friend who rarely uses crosswalks. He tends to walk into traffic while shouting "Plot armor!". He has yet to be run over, so this has an excellent track record. Yet I suspect it just might be other than the greatest of all possible ideas, despite the lack of demonstrated failures.
(Yes, this is absurd. Yes, I've told him this is clearly a bad idea. Yes, it's actually true.)
Which is to say one should be cautious of survivorship biases and the role of context. Judging traditions as successful based on a limited context where they haven't obviously failed both ignores the situation upon which they may depend and other scenarios where precisely those might have failed. Like the other people who have tried what my friend has and been rendered into chunky salsa for it.
Not at all. Traditions become traditions over long periods of time. Thus, they tend to be collections of things that haven't caused a societal failure in the last several hundred years, which is a much better record than not causing immediate failure.