The Limits of Faultless Disagreement

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Some have argued that the possibility of faultless disagreement gives relativist semantic theories an important explanatory advantage over their absolutist and contextualist rivals. Here I combat this argument, focusing on the specific case of aesthetic discourse. My argument has two stages. First, I argue that while relativists may be able to account for the possibility of faultless aesthetic disagreement, they nevertheless face difficulty in accounting for the intuitive limits of faultless disagreement. Second, I develop a new non-relativist theory which can account for the full range of data regarding faultless disagreement. This view—‘Humean Absolutism’—integrates two of Hume’s central principles from Of the Standard of Taste into a truth-conditional framework, resulting in a non-bivalent theory of aesthetic truth. I argue that Humean Absolutism can underwrite the possibility of faultless disagreement whilst retaining reasonable limits around the phenomenon. I close by relating this positive account of faultless disagreement to broader issues concerning the cognitive role of truth-value gaps. *NB - this is an unpublished paper and is no longer in progress.*
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2014-02-18
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Relativism and Monadic Truth.Cappelen, Herman & Hawthorne, John

View all 28 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
477 ( #7,945 of 47,276 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
15 ( #38,854 of 47,276 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.