Conclusion

All good things must come to an end, and that includes this paper. After a critical analysis of Postman's argument presented in a few chapters of his book, I must conclude that Postman failed to support his argument. The sources he uses are not credible, or they are used out of context. Also, it is obvious that Postman doesn't understand statistical analysis or sociological methods by the way he makes generalizations about social science and social scientists. Postman is a very intelligent man, and he is well-respected in his field. I am not claiming that Postman is an incompetent writer, lecturer, etc. My assessment of this argument is that Postman has bitten off more than he can chew. He throws out accusations and generalizations, but he is unable to prove them with supporting evidence. The sources he does have are inadequate. It appears that he is just reaching out there, hoping to hit the right note (or in this case the right source). I attribute this to his lack of understanding of social science, statistics, polling, and sociological methodology. With a better understanding of these things, Postman could have had a good argument. Without this knowledge, Postman's argument is faulty, unreliable, and stereotypical. I feel that I have successfully proved this throughout my paper.