[MD] in defence of the "relative"

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Matt,

Mat:
> Personally, I don't think "conceptual relativism" of the
> kind I outlined above (which takes seriously the idea of
> radically different alternative conceptual schemes) is in
> the end viable for transcendental reasons similar to
> Kant's (Donald Davidson's kind of transcendental
> deduction of the possiblity of communication).  But it
> might be important to mull over.

Steve:
I don't know what transcentental reasons are, but Stout pointed out
that any disagreement must take place against a background of
agreement for two people to recognize that they are in fact
disagreeing. So there is a limit to disagreement dispite this
"conceptual relativism."

Best,
Steve