{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01871657754010695, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.717557251908397, '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}}
Response to Errol Harris's Review of Hegel's Circular Epistemology

Any author ought to feel grateful for the kind of discussion Professor Errol Harris has provided of my recent study of Hegel.' The review is serious, informed, and manifests a determined effort, in an appropriately Hegelian spirit often missing in the Hegelian literature, to measure the positive contribution as well as the limits of the work at hand. In Harris' case, this takes the form of a defense of Hegel against what he believes to be the critical side of my book. As this is perhaps a rare instance in which the book under review has been understood and discussed on an appropriate philosophical level, a response may be useful in order further to advance the discussion.