When I had my little revelation about the possible causation of what we’ve been going through as a nation, aside from multiple traumas, I suggested postmodernism. Which is pretty hard to make sense of for an untutored mind like mine. (I’m being ironic with that word, “untutored.”)
But today, a reader of the New York Times commented on one of the columns — I think Patrick Healey’s, in which he continued a “discussion” he has had with a small group of so-called undecided young voters. As usual, one of them said something particularly empty-headed, the sort of thing that gets a whole bunch of readers thoroughly irritated.
When I dip into such columns, I don’t waste any time getting irate. Instead, I click on the “comments” button at a goodly speed, and let my fellow readers yell at Healey so I can relax. “Hah!” I think to myself. “They took care of him.”
Today, though, among the comments was one that called up my own ideas about postmodernism (and why young people might have become so inane). The guy is or was apparently a university teacher. Here’s what he wrote:
In 1992, I asked a University class, “Raise your hand, if you already believe X about an event, but I could still change your mind, using logic and relevant evidence?” One hand out of 25 went up. I said to the others, “That’s Post-Modern.” One student spoke for the class,”We know what you want us to write for a grade. That’s your business. Why would we let you change our minds?” 1992