12 Rules for Life (Full) ENGLISH

you might think, as the social sciences are more effective disciplines than
their cynical critics appreciate). Thus, not only is the state supporting one-
sided radicalism, it is also supporting indoctrination. We do not teach our
children that the world is flat. Neither should we teach them unsupported
ideologically-predicated theories about the nature of men and women—or the
nature of hierarchy.
It is not unreasonable to note (if the deconstructionists would leave it at
that) that science can be biased by the interests of power, and to warn against
that—or to point out that evidence is too often what powerful people,
including scientists, decide it is. After all, scientists are people too, and
people like power, just like lobsters like power—just like deconstructionists
like to be known for their ideas, and strive rightly to sit atop their academic
hierarchies. But that doesn’t mean that science—or even deconstructionism—
is only about power. Why believe such a thing? Why insist upon it? Perhaps
it’s this: if only power exists, then the use of power becomes fully justifiable.
There is no bounding such use by evidence, method, logic, or even the
necessity for coherence. There is no bounding by anything “outside the text.”
That leaves opinion—and force—and the use of force is all too attractive,
under such circumstances, just as its employment in the service of that
opinion is all too certain. The insane and incomprehensible postmodern
insistence that all gender differences are socially constructed, for example,
becomes all too understandable when its moral imperative is grasped—when
its justification for force is once and for all understood: Society must be
altered, or bias eliminated, until all outcomes are equitable. But the bedrock
of the social constructionist position is the wish for the latter, not belief in the
justice of the former. Since all outcome inequalities must be eliminated
(inequality being the heart of all evil), then all gender differences must be
regarded as socially constructed. Otherwise the drive for equality would be
too radical, and the doctrine too blatantly propagandistic. Thus, the order of
logic is reversed, so that the ideology can be camouflaged. The fact that such
statements lead immediately to internal inconsistencies within the ideology is
never addressed. Gender is constructed, but an individual who desires gender
re-assignment surgery is to be unarguably considered a man trapped in a
woman’s body (or vice versa). The fact that both of these cannot logically be
true, simultaneously, is just ignored (or rationalized away with another