The document discusses how postmodernism arose from a valid postmodern critique of knowledge but took things too far by rejecting consistency and truth altogether. It argues that while the postmodern critique properly challenged theories of knowledge, postmodernism went too far by challenging truth itself without valid logical arguments. While there is no single logical way to adjudicate between postmodern and non-postmodern approaches, practical and reductio ad absurdum considerations lend support to maintaining consistency and truth as theoretical frameworks.