[tim333]

I'm glad Dawkins has not got into social epistemology. His reasoning seems very clear.

For comparison here is some Asta, where the jargon leaves me unclear at what she is saying:

>Gender is a paradigm case for me. However, even if we assume that my account does justice to the construction of gender, the question remains whether this notion of social construction and social meaning is really adequate for accounting for the metaphysics of all social categories of individuals. Perhaps the two aims pull in opposite direction here: theorizing the type of social construction involved with gender, on the one hand, and offering a general metaphysics of social categories of individuals, on the other.,

[kelseyfrog]

Asta is simply applying a little self-critique by asking, "Is my account complete?" You can rest assured that not understanding the quoted passage does not influence one's ability to understand the rest of the work.