So today, one of the students in my Composition class told me that it was impossible for them to analyze a reading and derive the obvious political message from it (domestic violence and culture). This particular student is relatively bright, in the top 1/3 of the class, but for some reason, holds a view that is unfortunately still too common among young people, a naive belief in wholly subjective knowledge. Unless the student can overcome this way of thinking, in the short term, they will have difficulty passing my class with the grade they ought to get, but more importantly, in the longterm, they will face paralysis in the face of real-world situations that require them to have principles.

Our kids are no longer dualists. They believe that there isn't a single right answer to a problem. Most of them reject the dichotomy of good/evil as defined by good possessing characteristics supposedly intrinsic only to the group they belong to. We've gotten past that. That's wonderful and a credit to our systems. We've even internalized that legitimate authorities disagree on various issues. We believe that everyone has a right to their opinion, disagreeable as that opinion might be. However, somewhere along the way, we've also decided that opinions are created equal, and that substantiation is an issue of lesser importance than the somehow more important value of "Having an opinion."

Epistemology is important. It consists of the set of assumptions a person makes when reflecting on how they know whatever it is that they know. Our epistemological development has consequences and implications.

I'm not one to blame the kids for their wishy-washy responses. No, not all responses are valid. No, not all political systems are the same. Even though we'd like them to be, because it makes choice a guilt-free issue (presuming of course, that choice is something we engage ourselves in dialogue with) We are apathetic and guilty of the sin of Multiplicity in large part due to our cultural flaws and the system we raise them in. Critical thinking and metacognition (self-monitoring) are not values we instil either in ourselves or in our kids, not even through our educational systems. Or perhaps this is a New Jersey thing, in which case I'm happy to be wrong. Over half of the kids in my undergrad Comp 102 class are unable to even read critically. A significant amount of class time has to be spent rewiring their synapses to create neuronal networks that ought to be in place by now. Getting through to them is a slow process but I'm getting measurably closer.

Anyone interested in education has probably heard of the 9 Perry positions of intellectual and ethical development. It basically posits that epistemologically, there are 4 basic ways of thinking that people fall into. Dualism, Multiplicity, Contextual relativism and Commitment. Post-commitment is the highest value according to Perry. A post-committed thinker is aware of the necessity of commitment to the best course of action after having evaluated her choices and become not only aware of the implications of said choices but also of the reality that commitment is a dialogue that evolves and unfolds. The post-committed thinker is not one with naive, unquestioned commitment to "beliefs."

The appeal to apathy or cynicism is something both us and our kids have to be taught out of. Yes, there are various answers to political issues, but not all of them carry equal moral weight. It is not simply a matter of taste. This isn't about deciding between a pizza and a calzone. The implications cannot be ducked by saying there is no right answer so I don't have to think about it or be challenged.The world is complex and relativistic but if we are unable to engage it on the right level, we're shortchanging ourselves.

Next week, my students will read Denis Johnson's Jesus' Son and analyze it for the theme of my class: Trauma. What I've been having them do is essentially redefine their understanding of the word Trauma as they go. The implications of the word itself require them to make moral choices and analyze readings to get to the heart, the invisible trauma that the stories are in response to. An approach that cannot engage the reading will not be enough.