Fisher's reading of social constructionist and relational theory is unfortunate. In the first instance, he fails to see that constructionism makes no attempt to establish a foundational ontology in which either agency or its absence is declared real or true. The relational alternative to the traditional account of agency as internal origination is not offered as a truth posit but a contribution to societal practice. On this view, agency is not `empirically' available, as Fisher contends, but is a constitutive achievement of relationships. In this light, Fisher's concern with the function of the traditional conception of agency in maintaining the moral order is salutary.
