{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03313253012048193, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.785714285714286, '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}}
Defending the Conception of “Objective Risk”

The notion of “objective risk” is frequently discussed within the risk literature. While some argue that risk analysis measures objective risk, others claim that there are no real, objective risks—only subjective descriptions of them. “Objectivity” in these discussions often presupposes value‐free, dispassionate, and impartial analysis. Feminist epistemology offers a different interpretation of “objectivity” that is more context‐bound. It is argued that even though every risk can be described in several different ways, and does involve value judgments and emotions, the objectivity ideal should not be abandoned.