Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Who's talking?

Letters

I am sure that I was not the only one to feel instinctively irritated by the assertion on the cover of last week's issue, that 'everyone likes' competitive dialogue.

For a start, the expression 'competitive dialogue' is oxymoronic, yet the headline as a whole gave us no hint that we were supposed to be amused, or take it at anything but its face value.

Dialogue is characterised by convergence, competition by divergence. Convergence might indeed be considered a basis for marriage, as suggested by your headline. Divergence, however, is divorce incarnate.

Any truth in your assertion that everyone 'likes' such an ambiguous activity would lie along the lines that they enjoyed it as a spectator sport, where underdogs might be favoured and rooted for, and losers scorned appropriately.

Any competitive activity tests only the skills applicable to that activity, which, in this case, appears to be arguing. I am not certain that an ability to win an argument is a very useful prequalication for someone entrusted with organising a venue for some Olympic Games.

Maybe I'm wrong. In this instance, time will probably tell.

Malcolm Cox (M), 3 The Exchange, South Brent, Devon, TQ10 9AE

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.