{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01757469244288225, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0023432923257176333, 'mean_word_length': 5.233576642335766, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Reply to Hekman

my critique of feminist empiricism and feminist standpoint theories, yet I covertly appeal to a foundationalist conception of rationality in the final section of the article. I would like to address each of these charges in turn. With respect to the first point, my article opens with a simple observation: At a time when numerous arguments have been advanced that philosophers ought to abandon their preoccupation with epistemology, feminist theorists have been drawn to systematic consideration of theories of knowledge. The article then identifies a number of legitimate concerns that inspire feminists to confront epistemological issues. At no point do I suggest that feminists ought to abandon this realm of inquiry. Quite to the contrary, the explicit objective of the essay is to advance a conception of knowledge that will avoid certain contradictions characteristic of alternative approaches. The conception of cognition as a human practice is identified from the outset as "a critical feminist epistemology" (538). To support her claim that I misrepresent postmodernism, Hekman quotes a sentence fragment out of context. She asserts that I reject postmodernism on the grounds that it "is ultimately flawed by its 'total repudiation of either external reality or the capacity for critical reflection and rational judgment.' "1 Having attributed to me the notion that postmodernism entails the relinquishing of critique, she refutes my alleged view by noting that critique is central to the work of postmodern thinkers. My article does not claim that postmodernism precludes critique. On the contrary, I praise postmodern critiques of the subject/self, of scientistic hubris, of the