I disagree. The text was trying to get students to think rationally, be open to contrary ideas, and to use logic and argument to examine and discuss ideas. I d

I disagree. The text was trying to get students to think rationally, be open to contrary ideas, and to use logic and argument to examine and discuss ideas. I don't want to say that this is only a millennial issue, as I've seen sloppy thinking in people from multiple generations, but what he's addressing are very much tactics millennials are in the habit of using to shut down a discussion (using isms to bypass clearly expressing or thinking of an issue, using feelings to avoid being proven wrong, a lack of belief in absolute truths, etc). Clear critical thinking is important, and requires skills that don't always just show up by default, and this is just done of the current cultural issues that get in the way of that. Edit: having read your response to the other comment, I think the whole diversity and equality thing is coming from a millennial belief in ideals that must be shown and proven to be ultimates. Virtue is one, and every generation seems to value a different subset of virtues. Like the Romans valued honor, courage and strength, only valuing those still lead to a lot of things that go against other virtues. I agree the argument made in the article isn't the best one, but I believe it was aimed at the students who have never even questioned those terms, and they definitely exist.