A new year, rebirth, a clean slate. Cyclicality is the binding force of our lives. Small deaths between two sunrises. A new week, a monthly summary. A semester. New Year’s Eve. We bow our heads before decades. But these only carry meaning if we are consistent in direction. If there is a certain linearity. Yet the development of life is not necessarily only teleological and unilinear.

According to nineteenth-century evolutionist anthropology, the development of societies and cultures is unilinear and teleological, meaning that every community passes through the same successive stages toward a predetermined “more advanced” state. Representatives of this view, such as Herbert Spencer, Lewis Henry Morgan, and Edward Burnett Tylor, believed that social development progresses from the simple to the complex and ultimately regarded Western civilization as the pinnacle of development. Morgan distinguished three main stages (savagery, barbarism, and civilization), while Tylor described the development of culture, especially religion, as gradual progress. These theories were strongly progress-oriented and Eurocentric, as they considered Western societies to be the norm and ultimate goal.

In the twentieth century, this perspective was widely criticized, primarily by proponents of cultural relativism and historical particularism, for example, in the work of Franz Boas. Critics argued that there is no single path of development that all societies follow and that cultures cannot be ranked into “more advanced” and “more backward” categories. Later, the theory of multilinear evolution (e.g., Julian Steward, Leslie White) emphasized that development can occur in multiple directions and always depends on specific environmental, historical, and social conditions. Thus, classical unilinear and teleological evolutionism is now considered oversimplified and scientifically problematic.

Development requires stepping out of comfort and routine. We break habitual cycles so that something new may emerge. All of this according to our own context. Viewing our lives from a bird’s-eye perspective is painful. It is undoubtedly uncomfortable. Unpleasant and frightening. Fear is a natural reaction to an unfamiliar situation that we may instinctively register as dangerous. But if we tolerate the discomfort, change begins.

The worst part of plunging into cold water is the first few moments of slow immersion. We want to flee as every cell in our body protests. But if we are able to stay, the unpleasant sensation subsides, and we begin to swim. We get used to it. We come to like it. Some even become addicted to this health-promoting activity.

So the difficult part is perseverance—when we see neither good nor useful by-products of our efforts. For this, we need a good “why.” Health, recognition, and success are not enough. A deeper key is needed to endure the unbearable. Because transition is uncomfortable. This intermediate “nothingness” is aptly summarized by Gennep’s theory.

Anthropological rites of passage are culturally regulated ceremonies that mark important status changes in an individual’s life, such as the transition from childhood to adulthood, from being single to marriage, or from civilian life to a religious role. The concept was developed by Arnold van Gennep, who argued that these rites consist of three stages: separation, the transitional “in-between” state (liminality), and reintegration into a new status (incorporation). The social function of rites of passage is to provide a structured framework for uncertain life phases, reduce the tension caused by change, and reinforce the individual’s new identity in the eyes of the community.

Development is culturally relative, and colonialist ideas should not label us with artificial and flawed notions of a false, ethnocentric hierarchy.

We face choices every day. What we invest our attention in. Which part of our attention do we dress, spotlight, and care about? I believe that alongside our core values, it is important to have our own hierarchy because we cannot simultaneously be environmentalists, animal rights activists, human rights activists, LGBTQ+ activists, anti-capitalists, or feminists with the same intensity. Attention and focus are lost. These can coexist, but specialization is needed—something to which we devote special attention. And this does not mean that it is more important than other causes in general. It merely shows what is more important to us or where we currently have more resources.

I consider myself fortunate, and I say so because I grew up with two wonderful parents. Shaped by them, but not completely from them. My father passed on to me a moral value system with sufficient humor and a pure heart. He did not raise me; he was not present. My mother raised me but did not provide such a system. I mention this because it shows that both would have been possible: to raise me, to be present, and at the same time to teach morality, self-development, and spiritual and physical health. In theory. But life is messy and chaotic, and we do not exist in a vacuum. We react because we feel. And that is as it should be. Passivity kills our true humanity.

My parents’ example taught me that it is unrealistic to expect everything from one person. What we receive is complete only if, alongside joy, it also contains transience, pain, and sadness. Proportions matter, of course, but distilled water is not a good long-term choice either, as it lacks ions, despite being free of impurities. I do not believe that any experience or feeling is contamination. The sun rises. Then it sets. Darkness is good for something different than light, but it is not lower in a hierarchy. They are not comparable.

Thus, change is full of contradictions and resistance, whether it involves changing political systems, parties, or moving. Familiarity rocks us in lukewarm water. We know it. We have seen it. And change may contain unknown evils, which seem more dangerous from afar since we have not yet experienced them. We have not yet grown accustomed to them; we cannot yet sigh indifferently and move on from the fact that those leading a country on the brink of bankruptcy grow richer year after year.

But only one thing lasts forever: our anxiety that choices and their consequences will last forever. I find it ironic that we constantly fear permanence or instability. We have no control over either. But in my view, the only constant is that we fear irreversible, eternal outcomes.

According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, the physiological and safety needs at the base of the pyramid (such as food, water, sleep, physical and financial security) provide the fundamental motivational force without which a person cannot pursue higher-order goals such as self-actualization or long-term change. These needs ensure that attention is not directed solely toward survival but also free up resources for development and inner motivation. Empirical studies have shown that satisfying basic needs is positively associated with increased motivation and well-being.

In addition, several surveys in Hungary highlight a social phenomenon that reflects my personal experience: according to the GWI Consumer Attitudes Survey, Hungarians are among the most pessimistic nations regarding their own and their country’s economic future. This partly explains why it is more difficult to develop higher-level motivation and a positive future outlook in an environment where even security and basic needs do not seem stable.

I spent the past year in West Asia. There, a local taxi driver gave me a concise summary of an observation that captured the essence of this phenomenon.

He said that they do not waste a single minute because who knows what the next one will bring. If he likes someone, he goes up to them and asks them out. In the worst case, he is rejected. The world does not collapse. He has been rejected many times. But today, his wife is the one who accepted his invitation.

Where mortality, war, and the accompanying uncertainty are tangible parts of everyday life, fear of negative outcomes diminishes. The worst that can happen is rejection, a fall, or replanning. Failure hurts, and that is as it should be. But pain makes life complete. And with it comes joy, because there is pride in having tried. We act instead of sitting on a plastic chair drinking tea and mourning the past and the future simultaneously while life slips by unnoticed before us.

By contrast, the deeply rooted essence of Hungarian attitudes is acceptance instead of change. A few proverbs illustrate this:

“Do not leave the beaten path for the unbeaten.” “Better the old trouble than the new unknown.” “Old shoes are more comfortable than new ones.”

Society changes in this attitude across generations, but cultural and historical heritage is undeniable. It is truly dreadful to stand before a blank page with nothing. But just as immobility is not the cure for numbness—movement is—we must place one foot in front of the other to move forward.

We must break habitual cycles so that something new may emerge. If we tolerate discomfort, change truly arrives. It may reward us or bring failure. But we tried. And that experience is, in any case, a gain. Because if we take risks, we act. Passivity is the greatest antidote to life.

References

Boas, F. (1911). The mind of primitive man. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.
Morgan, L. H. (1877). Ancient society. New York, NY: Henry Holt.
Spencer, H. (1876– The principles of sociology (Vols. 1–3). London: Williams and Norgate.
Steward, J. H. (1955). Theory of culture change: The methodology of multilinear evolution. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Tylor, E. B. (1871). Primitive culture. London: John Murray.
van Gennep, A. (1960). The rites of passage (M. B. Vizedom & G. L. Caffee, Trans.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1909)
White, L. A. (1959). The evolution of culture. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
GWI Global Consumer Attitudes Survey. (2023 Hungarians’ economic pessimism. Publicis Groupe Hungary.