Because we do not have a unified account of the presence and absence of women in male or patriarchal canonical thought – if that is even possible or desirable – I refer to their presence and absence as the ways of women in canonical thought, hereafter “the ways of women”. We also do not know yet whether we as women are making different ways into canonical thought, whether we are creating a women’s canonical thought, or whether we could abandon the idea of canonical thought. Taking this uncertain…
Read moreBecause we do not have a unified account of the presence and absence of women in male or patriarchal canonical thought – if that is even possible or desirable – I refer to their presence and absence as the ways of women in canonical thought, hereafter “the ways of women”. We also do not know yet whether we as women are making different ways into canonical thought, whether we are creating a women’s canonical thought, or whether we could abandon the idea of canonical thought. Taking this uncertainty to heart, I consider what these possibilities have in common, namely, a demand for a freedom of canonical thought. By freedom of canonical thought, I understand a freedom to conform or not to canonical thinking. I consider some basic epistemological assumptions about such a freedom, and whether this may be a step toward a critique of the ways of women in thinking canons.
