This is essentially a subtrope of the law of unintended consequences. In sociology, they like to make a distinction between the intended purpose of a social structure of institution versus its actual function. That is, a prison may be intended to deter crime, but they also function as networking opportunities and university courses for career criminals. Because intent is so hard to disentangle from collectively created or emergent systems, sometimes sociologists like to chant “The purpose of a system is what it does.”
Chesterson’s Fence might be more broadly applicable if we don’t understand “why” as human intent, or learning the history of the fence. Those are just hats you can wear to understand the system and the potential unseen pitfalls of change.
This is essentially a subtrope of the law of unintended consequences. In sociology, they like to make a distinction between the intended purpose of a social structure of institution versus its actual function. That is, a prison may be intended to deter crime, but they also function as networking opportunities and university courses for career criminals. Because intent is so hard to disentangle from collectively created or emergent systems, sometimes sociologists like to chant “The purpose of a system is what it does.”
Chesterson’s Fence might be more broadly applicable if we don’t understand “why” as human intent, or learning the history of the fence. Those are just hats you can wear to understand the system and the potential unseen pitfalls of change.