Abstract

In this paper I will trace a possible overlap between the Davidsonian appeal to the principle of charity in connection with the interpretation of a radically different language and an idea that can be found in the writing of Stanley Cavell. While Cavell puts forward his idea as an understanding of the work of the later Wittgenstein, I want to treat these ideas as standing on their own and I shall leave aside any assessment of Wittgenstein scholarship. What we learn from Davidson is that the principle of charity is not optional and that it goes deep. What I find in the work of Cavell is a possible account of why the principle is not optional and a sense of just how deep it goes. What we learn from the work of both of these philosophers is the way in which linguistic competence can be both deeply personal and yet shared.