In a dialectical tradition the term new describes a creation out of nothing: Something that the world has not seen/heard before. In that way, the term new consists of a concept of 2 grades: In the second grade new means progress; in the first grade new means the dialectical antithesis to old, habitually, repeated, etc. But we cannot empirical see, what is not new, and in which context we need something new or not - whatever "the new thing" could be and what is the proof for that need. That is why I found the concept of "the believe in a lack of something new" - which describes the non-provable statement, that something new is needed. And because we cannot say what is the need of something new, and new is only a type of progress (both understood in a dialectical way), it is possible, that "the new thing" could be "the wrong new thing". That kind of dilemma is a typical product of a dialectical understatement of the world. The consequence is a not ending loop of creating something new, say that it is old, and create something new again etc. But there are different ways we could handle something new: for example by a constructive understatement, when every musical experience is in fact something new for that person. In context of new compositions that means, that everything what a composer might think of is new, is probably only new for him. Which is not a false analysis, but an other way of handling new compositions, and new music in general.
and here is the original text: