{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03310344827586207, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008735632183908045, 'mean_word_length': 5.164305949008498, '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}}
Hermeneutics and the Sociology of Knowledge . By Susan J. Hekman (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame, 1986. 224p. $29.95).

liberal theorists (Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau) had different approaches to the dilemmas (clarified by his analysis of formal theorists), with Rousseau's general-will solution—adopting community will and morality as one's own —providing the "exit routes" for these dilemmas (chap. 4, p. 98). Frohock's own skillful and easily followed route through formal theory is continued in his assessments of rationality and reasoning (chap. 5), and rational forms (chap. 6)'. The path, clear enough for undergraduate use even though it advances the literature, provides a framework for pursuing careful assessment of the options for treating the fit between collective-choice theory and moral decisions, for moving from the rational individual to appropriate grounds for collective commitments on specific actions. Perhaps the single most powerful dimension of the book is that it makes clear to both proponents and opponents of rational-choice analysis just what is missing in the effort to deal with liberal and democratic theories from the choice perspective. Traditional theorists troubled by rational analysis will better grasp what is missing in the formal approaches; formal theorists will see what conditions are not resolved within their theories. Defining reasoning as deliberation (dealing within the realm of uncertainties)—as isolation of things that count as good reasons—rather than counting reasoners under a democratic motif permits one to move the discussion out of the constraints of formal choice of individuals (which leads to inconsistencies in collectivizing the will) into individual choices within the discourse that provides reasons for collective action that can be shared: "The task of political inquiry, once individuals are accepted explicitly as reasoning agents, is to recognize the juridical forms that are compatible with individual minds. . . . Individuals who are rational on reasons must rely on rules that govern; and the unity of minds can be located in the rules by means of which self-legislation occurs" (p. 159).