This paper compares two ‘relativist’ theories about deliciousness: truth-relativism, and Kit Fine’s non-factualism about a subject-matter. Contemporary truth-relativism is presented as a linguistic thesis; its metaphysical underpinning is often neglected. I distinguish three views about the obtaining of worldly states of affairs concerning deliciousness, and argue that none yields a satisfactory version of truth-relativism. Finean non-factualism about deliciousness is not subject to the problems with truth-relativism. I conclude that Finean non- factualism is the better relativist theory. As I explain, non-facualism about deliciousness is happily combined with an invariantist semantics for the word “delicious”. On this approach, relativism is a matter for a metaphysical theory, not a linguistic one.
This is an author-produced, peer-reviewed version of this article. The final, definitive version of this document can be found online at Synthese, published by Springer. Copyright restrictions may apply. doi: 10.1007/s11229-015-0787-0
Jackson, Alexander. (2016). "From Relative Truth to Finean Non-Factualism". Synthese, 193(3), 971-989.