Welcome to the Dept of Depth.

Everybody loves genuine smarts, you see. If you can fake that, you’ve hit paydirt.

It’s pretty simple, too. Smart people say they like intelligent arguments but all they’re looking for is someone who agrees with them on the things they feel strongly about and disagrees on the things they aren’t particularly worried about anyway.

That’s what it means to ‘argue intelligently’.

So. How to do this. It’s much simpler than you’d think. Pick a book, any book. Skim through. Pick up the fancy words and the chunky bytes of data that can hang snugly around your mind’s teeth.

Extrapolate.

Data begat data, who begat data who begat data who begat data watered down by the factor of n.

Literally every piece of (random) information that drops into the unprotected funnel that is your mind can be used in another formula. There is no such thing as trivia. Familiarize yourself with the buzzwords associated with depth. Let ‘catharsis’ bring you catharsis. Mix a drop of existentialism with the general brew of the metaphysical and John Locke it until everything curdles. Sip. Stir with a spoonful of -isms, -logies, -ics. Down in slow, somber siplets.

Ask rhetorical questions that serve no purpose other than to emphasize how much of a punctilious prick you have become. It does not matter anyway; people will read it as deep stuff, man. Meta. Depth about depth. Yeah.

Read a (crappy) book. Find out only one other person you know has read it. Extol the virtues of the book and suggest that its contents are arcane. Lean into the humble-brag: ‘you shouldn’t read this; it’s boring. I almost gave up but I needed to know if the author justified his titular promise.’ Yes. Use words like ‘titular.’

Remember to say you do not watch TV. Do not say people who watch TV are idiots; let the nuances suggest that.

Get so deep that people are like whoa.

Data begat data begat data begat data but pray an invalid argument is never returned for your statements.