Abstract

In recent years, an approach within feminist philosophy of reason has emerged, for convenience called "gendered reason", that states that due to differences of sex and gender, women and men perceive, think, know, understand, judge, reason about, interact with others and (possibly) constitute the world in fundamentally distinct ways. On the basis of three distinct but interrelating arguments it is tried to show that there is a basic difficulty in maintaining at least some versions of this view; indeed that it may be fundamentally incoherent.