Specifically the manner in which these debates transpire.
First, you can never predict, nor purposely initiate, a running debate. They just sorta happen. Like a volcano eruption. Or a vurp.
Second, the makeup of the running group is crucial. To make fire you need, fuel, oxygen, and sufficient heat. For a running debate you need at least two people who are nimble of thought, and either stubborn or simply argumentative. If you're lucky, they are both.
Third, the running debate starts with what in any other context, would likely be a benign comment. For example "Google's downfall is inevitable."
Then the fun starts.
You might be saying to yourself, or maybe even out loud if you do that kind of thing, "All of this is equally applicable to any debate."
That's true. But wait, there's more...
The fourth aspect of running debates is the near total lack of structure or cogent argument. Points come and go. Logical basis is ignored. Eventually they turn into a tenuous string of barely related opinions, off-color or simply disgusting references, and made up facts. Yet the fervor and enthusiasm never waver, no matter how far off topic the discussion wanders.
Case in point, today's debate started with the Google comment above, then took a detour to the Yankees, US foreign policy in Afghanistan, Tiger Woods, and the anatomy of an elephant. All with the intent to make a point, the exact nature of which none of us could remember when we found ourselves back in the parking lot.
You just won't see that in a coffee shop. Perhaps it's related to oxygen deprivation.
Good running,
Doug
Numbers: 4.3 miles, that passed very quickly thanks to Eric and Mike.
No comments:
Post a Comment