Admittedly, no one has ever accused me of being short-winded. But ... that's not really it.
Ignoring the (possibly) unfortunate connotations of the term that you are using, it isn't the same as path dependency. While the examples I used to be illustrative are often common ones that are negative, path dependencies are usually positive. In other words, to use the easy example-
There are two roads in the forest. One leads to where you want to go, one doesn't. You take the left. At all points (until you've gone the distance where you know you've taken the incorrect road), it is less 'costly' to keep going down the road you're on, because 'switching' roads at the point is more expensive.
Now, if the other road is the correct one, this sucks. But if you're on the correct road, you don't even think about it. Which, again, is nothing more than the observation that ... history matters (it constrains and affects our choices).
Your phrase is a recitation about beliefs that are (usually) irrationally unquestionable and (usually) exempt from critique- which isn't the same thing at all. Recognizing the difference between the two things (what is a path dependency, and what is simply a belief people are holding onto) is kind of important.
Let's unpack an easy one- the six ability scores. People don't think they are exempt from critique- hardly a month goes by without someone proposing a new system here! And there have been multiple official efforts to change and amend them (adding abilities like comeliness, or the '12 abilities' of late-era 2e).
The reason people keep using them is because their use is so ingrained, and has gone on for so long, and is so deeply embedded with each and every D&D system, that to change them at this point would require a complete break from all prior editions- in effect, we have had (almost) 50 years using those ability scores, and while they have had slight alterations regarding them, they are so deeply embedded with the fabric of each and every edition of the game and rules that to change them would require a redo of the system of itself (which is hardly costless when it comes to selling the game to consumers).
Now, you might want to perform a similar exercise with alignment - I did not include it in my list, because at this time, they continued de-emphasizing of alignment with the rules means that for whatever controversies it might cause, the actual cost of removing it from the rules is getting less and less.
