Good information can be expressed with it. It can even be
   accurate and precise. I've seen and produced good examples of
   it, even long before I knew it was called "post modern". I'm
   writing "terse" and short here because I'm pressed for time. But
   given the time to just write, I can weave together a tale and
   use all the synonyms in my mental databank and turn 2+2=4 into a
   marvelous tale of systems upon systems, histories swirling,
   morphing and changing through time, cognitive structures alluded
   to and diving into quantum mechanics and poetry and music....
   ... yet I can also do the same with 2+2=5. That's what's scary
   about post modernism. If you're not paying attention to what
   they're saying, it can slide right by. == At the same time, it's
   easy to hide bullshit in every discipline. Just go through some
   of the open source theoretical physics papers sometimes. There's
   BS there too. Math tricks used to create improbably conclusions.
   I've seen it with logic. Nice logical structure but with bad
   beginnings lead to bad endings with perfect middles. Thought
   experiments are the worst offenders in this regard because we
   barely question their validity. We forget easily that: they're
   fiction. == The interesting thing is: Each of them DOES have
   their own logic. It's _possible_ in some way to justify any
   paper as correct. You can turn a logical inconsistency into an
   allegory or a metaphor, etc. That's what makes it easy to
   justify anything in _some way_ and also tricky to discern
   truth-values sometimes. ==