Yeah, it's not really wrong, though I would challenge "deep instincts" to a degree.

There is an aspect of "common sense" that absolutely comes from people attempting to keep themselves safe through learned behaviour, and the development of human capital from past experience. Tradition may have value as a useful mechanism that operate without proper alliteration.

MAY.

Keyword there.

Some traditions, like cultures, promote a version of "common sense" which is purely derived from people institutionalizing some sort of asserted wisdom based off of nothing. It's the reason a leftist thinks that it violates "common sense" that price controls will keep businesses from 'price gouging' because it threatens them if they use 'abusive pricing tactics to exploit people'.

Or, for more primitive societies, it would have been common sense for the Maya to use enemy nations royalty as human sacrifices to demonstrate their cultures "unquestionable strength" and that raping and enslaving populations that showed them resistance was a moral act of a superior people naturally ascending over an inferior people. The kind of violent power-based mentality that goes along with a civilization that simply asserts "might makes right" might be sensible for that civilization, even for a thousand years, but it might just be a horrifically stupid idea.

Think of it like this: hereditary rule makes common sense. If human capital for leadership is a skill that takes a great deal of time to develop, and the only way you can actually know how to rule is by having power and ruling over people, hereditary succession makes sense initially.

Right up until we see that it develops an aristocratic class of inbred that effectively doesn't give two shits about the people they rule over, and only cares about their specific current possessions. They don't care about anything they control because all they care about is seizing more land (or better land) from other people to increase their status among elites. The people living on that land are nothing more than cannon fodder at best, and an annoyance at worst. This is the aristocratic, globalist, imperial mind-set; but it's not new. It's a very old way of thinking that has always existed among the elites.

Traditions absolutely have value. The issue is that some traditions may only be valuable in certain places, at certain times. Humans must develop new traditions along with the development of their own human capital, along with changes in their environment.

Do not put blind faith in traditions, but do not just simply throw them away without understanding why they came about in the first place.