Abstract

Axel A. Barceló takes issue with my discussion of the dominant gender conception—according to which “woman” is the classical negation of “man”—as an example of logic-based hermeneutical injustice. His arguments are embedded in a more general critique of revisionist projects within feminist logic. [...] Barceló’s particular response relies on a number of assumptions which I think are worth pushing back against. In particular, I will argue that feminist logical revisionism does not depend on giving up universality or proving classical logical truths wrong; that feminist logical revisionist arguments are not meant to be judged in isolation from the rest of the logic literature; and that exploratory work in non-classical feminist logic stands in no special need of justification.