If we've learned nothing else in this new abnormal, we certainly ought to grasp the tentacles of impermanence in new and practical ways. We know impermanence through platitude — "this, too, shall pass" — and we know it through the daily realism of changing circumstances surrounding COVID-19.

The concept of impermanence nips at the heels of the heels we like to dig into terra firma. We dig digging in our heels more than ever. We think what we think. Facts may change but our opinions won't. But they need to.

Still, it is through the reality of impermanence that we should understand this much: If COVID's circumstances necessitate fluidity, our actions must thus remain fluid.

So I have a question: Why are we here in Connecticut staying married to the idea that distance learning precludes athletics from continuing in our schools? In the earlier days of the virus, consensus was simple: sports would not happen if the virus prohibited in-person learning. If they're not in school, they're not playing.

I'd like to further discuss. Because the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference's announcement of a delayed winter season Tuesday again presents changing circumstances that begets a shift in our thinking.

There were few arguments forthcoming about the original edict in March. Keep everyone away from each other as much as possible. But as we move toward winter and colder weather — and more limited opportunities to get outside and move around — I'd like to explore the concept of allowing basketball season to commence now, even if all schools are in remote learning.

Common sense suggests that COVID would have a hard time festering inside empty schools with nobody there to spread anything. And so what does science say about the true risk of playing basketball in schools already empty?

I figure it this way: Each school beings a maximum of 10 players, three coaches and a trainer. There are two referees, a site director, custodian, clock operator and scorebook person. That's 34 people. Round up to 40 to accommodate media and others here unintendedly omitted.

If everyone in the gym wears a mask — and the gyms have been sterilized — how high is the risk that anyone involved contracts COVID? I ask from ignorance here. I really don't know. But my (extremely) limited scientific prowess makes me think we could play, especially given that the Department of Public Health designated basketball as a "moderate risk" sport.

If science says my reasoning is flawed, I'll stifle myself faster than Edith Bunker. But if we're going to preclude athletics from happening for no other reason than that's the rule, dammit, and they'll be no further discussion, then I'll become a nuisance on the topic.

I'm not sure what to think. CIAC executive director Glenn Lungarini said Tuesday that based on a survey of member schools, 44.2 percent of those who responded said they'd allow athletic practices and games to continue even with distance learning. He said 14.7 percent would allow practices but no games and 41.1 percent said they'd suspend all athletics if they were forced to distance learn.

This suggests that we're not getting our information from the same places or we're processing it differently. I'm just not sure how to explain why some school systems are willing to play through distance learning and others aren't.

Not all distance learning happens for the same reasons. Example: Ledyard High finished its fall sports season last week despite full distance learning because its leadership was smart enough to understand that contact tracing related to one case (the reason they went remote) is significantly different than had the school been riddled with a high infection rate.

And that's the level of discernment we need throughout Connecticut. I just have the feeling there are too many people in and out of school system hierarchies who live through extremism over realism.

Seriously: We have morphed into extremists at both ends. The fatalists think leaving home without a suit of armor means a more certain death than the firing squad at dawn. The conspiracy theorists think the virus is a hoax and that mandated mask wearing robs them of their personal freedoms that are apparently more sacrosanct than the Beatitudes.

Then there are the rest of us poor souls simply trying to educate ourselves.

I'm not denying the virus will worsen over the holidays because people either 1) don't have the personal discipline to avoid large gatherings; or 2) value personal freedom over social responsibility.

But I still think we can play basketball, regardless of in-person learning. This is the time for discussion and compromise. If science can't produce a compelling argument that empty schools are unsafe, then let's play. And school systems shouldn't be obstructionist. Individual families can always opt out.

This is the opinion of Day sports columnist Mike DiMauro