48 The postmodern pluralist, who situates truth in local cultural contexts, self-contradictorily denies cross-cultural realities while allowing cross-individual realities, whereas they both face the identical problem: how two individuals anywhere can reach mutual understanding is the only mystery here. How two people from different cultures can understand each other is trivially different from how you and I can understand each other: the extraordinary leap is between any two minds, not any two cultures. If there are enough cross-individual realities between holons to constitute a cultural identity (as claimed by the postmodernist), then there are enough realities between cultures to constitute a global context (as denied by the same postmodernists). The fact of the matter is, nobody understands how “you” and “I” become a “we,” wherever that happens–and to privilege cross-individual cultural “we’s,” as the postmodernists do, while denying all others, is merely green-meme [read: pomo} absolutism.
I think trivially different is not the right phrase. Understanding between two different cultures does add another (often complicated and complicating) layer to understanding, but the general point is correct: it is different in degrees not kind (contra cultural island-ism) from the regular mysterious question of how anyone understands anyone else, whether they are members of the same culture or not.