proving a negative

i found myself in the midst of a debate late last night about the merits of gossip. for those who know me, believe it or not, i was on the con side. i state that to admit that while i have been known to browse through certain tabloid magazines, drop by a certain blog that peddles in celebrity "news" (the nom de plume of the blogger is partially shared with a certain celebutante), and partake in office chit chat, i still maintain that gossip is not an essential part of our daily lives and likely we would all be better off without it. my worthy debate opponent argued that it is an integral part of communication and vital for our day-to-day interactions.

mind you i think that we may have been working from different ideas of what entails "gossip," but i did pull this definition from wikipedia to help frame our discussion because i found it accurately reflected my perspective on gossip:

gossip is idle talk or rumour, especially about the personal or private affairs of others.

i think the reason why  i believe gossip is particularly unnecessary is that it rarely relies on facts but more often than not instead involves rumor, speculation, and innuendo. i had to admit though that having been the recent target of office gossip i might be hypersensitive about the matter and i disclosed this fact at the end of our chat. it seemed that part of my friend's argument was that gossip was not only a way to relay information necessary for a group of people to function but that it is a means for our brains to engage in an active processing of information, without which they would be reduced to if i recall the terminology correctly "gelatinous blobs."

so (as is often the case) we pretty much argued to a standstill. when i work up this morning though i was struck with a thought that i've had before following such discussions about human behavior -- that being that it is nearly impossible to prove a negative. in this case obviously it would be how our lives would be fine, if not better, without gossip. the fact is that even the wikipedia definition goes on to state that gossip is one of the oldest forms of human communication. it is a practice that is at the very foundation of our social structure. therefore, there exist numerous examples of how gossip has a place in our society. at the same time, i would submit, there exist no widely known examples of living a gossip-free existence. therefore, there are no manifest examples of the benefits of not engaging in gossip or, at the very least, that it's absence would not be detrimental to our lives.

it's really a challenge to prove a point when you have the whole of human existence providing evidence against you. somehow, that doesn't manage to prevent me from trying.