>>Feepin+(OP)
And yet we make progress. It seems we've historically mostly been effective at hanging on to positive change, and discarding negative change
>>skohan+Mz
Yes, but that's an active process. You can't just be "pro change".
Occasionally, in high risk situations, "good change good, bad change bad" looks like "change bad" at a glance, because change will be bad by default without great effort invested in picking the good change.