Thank you, Gary for your lucid and detailed exposition. I agree with what you say except for two points.

One is that, though you are correct about conservatism being relative to the culture in which it occurs, what is not relative is the worldview that the tradition of that culture must be maintained. This is the approach that Burke takes and fiercely defends--that the current set of social norms for any culture should be maintained for that culture. That is why he could, at the same time and without contradiction, defend British tradition against progressive social movements and defend Indian tradition against the aggression of the British East India Company. Burke does not make an argument that what is is best but that what is has a moral status that must be, as he said, treated with a reverence akin to religion. He supported the American War of Independence precisely because he agreed with the claim that Parliament was not honoring the tradition of British common law.

Second, I agree with your description of Burke providing an error theory, but I don't agree with what he was seeing as the error to be avoided. What you say about Burke wanting to avoid overly aggressive change, hence his opposition to the French Revolution, but that's only part of his error theory. I agree with Mary Wollstonecraft's critique of Burke accusing the latter of defending social privilege under the guise of defending tradition. She points out that Burke's justification of inherited wealth contradicted his acceptance if Locke's labor theory of property. That contradiction is emblematic of Burke's worldview. There is much about Burke's thought that is admirable, but his central idea was that things are the way they are for good reasons, and Wollstonecraft is correct that such an assumption attempts to minimize rational assessment of privilege and status.

Thanks again, for your thoughts, which I will save as a resource as I continue to work on the book.