This is a brief reply to Malewski's response to our article, "Disciplined Judgment: Toward a Reasonably Constrained Constructivism." There are several essential problems with the arguments presented in his article: (a) first, the intentions ascribed to our project in Dr. Malewski's response are inaccurate; (b) the response is supported by a false dichotomy between access to canonical knowledge and social justice; and (c) some examples used to support claims in the response are hyperbolic. We believe that this sort of interaction is a good model of scholarly discourse and we hope that this sustained discussion of our disagreements will produce the sort of discourse that can increase understandings across theoretical and political divides and eventually contribute to efforts to bring about positive social change.