Abstract for Wright’s talk

I take  up the issue whether any contemporary form of relativism about truth—including the assessment-relativism developed by John MacFarlane for the purposes of descriptive semantic theory of certain regions of discourse — can contribute to the classical metaphysical debates about realism and objectivity in which alethic relativism was traditionally taken to be a player.  One folk-philosophical thought about some regions of discourse—par excellence, basic taste and comedy—is that their lack of objectivity crystallises in the possibility of ‘faultless disagreements’ expressible using their signature vocabulary. It is argued that none of the extant forms of relativism provides a fully satisfactory explanation of what a relevantly faultless disagreement might consist in, but that a better account of the notion may be forthcoming from the perspective of a quite different approach.