There was a 40 year old flight attendant on my flight today who had a fauxhawk. My immediate reaction to this was that it looked ridiculous. I understand they are all the rage today, but looking back at it in 20 years it will look as ridiculous as a beehive or a poodle skirt does today. Generally I, and I think people in general, tend to have a negative reaction to actions or acts that they deem to be a passing fad.
But it is as unfair to judge a fad as it is to judge a society’s morals, language, etc. in retrospect. I can’t say that it is ridiculous for the Romans to have spoken Latin, even though it is ridiculous for someone to speak Latin nowadays. Extending our moral code to people during most of history makes nearly all people immoral. And if you used the moral code that will exist in 100 years to judge morality today, nearly all people would be immoral. I think language is different from moral code and fads, however, because language is not something people think they choose, whereas participation in a fad or having certain morals appears to be more of a choice.
Of course there has to be some explanation for why passing fads of fashion or morals exist, and I think it is because people genuinely believe they look good or act morally in a timeless sort of way. When making choices relating to fashion and moral codes, the conscious mind seems to think it is making timeless and objective decisions, even though when looking at historical fashion and moral codes we come to the conclusion that they are certainly not timelessly or objectively chosen. People argue that moral codes “improve” over time, but what they are really saying is that our moral code is timelessly and objectively the best and moral codes in history have in general trended towards our best moral code. If you were to reverse the order of moral codes in history, we would come to the same conclusion.