That essay is itself part of the philosophy of mathematics, not the foundation of mathematics. It is the author's explanation of the role and definition of "foundations of mathematics", and thus as I said the essay itself really belongs to philosophy of mathematics.
If you are interested in the foundations of mathematics, then you would be pointed towards mathematical logic and axiomatic set theory and/or category theory. These subjects are extremely rigorous and would never contain such a vague statement as:
"1. All human knowledge is conceptual and forms an integrated whole. All human knowledge is contextual and hierarchical."
except perhaps in the preface, or in the end of chapter notes /motivational material. Such a statement lies clearly in the domain of th philosophy of mathematics, which is a sub-branch of philosophy, and so bears little resemblance to mathematics itself.
To get an idea about what FOM is all about it might be better to glance through that same author's publication list (although the library is a better place to start):
http://www.math.psu.edu/simpson/papers/
The statement about "all human knowledge..." is an attempt by a mathematician to go outside of his specialty and do philosophy, and so the most polite thing I can say is that I did not find any of the statements in that essay to be worthwhile.