Three models of conceptual schemes

Despite widespread confusion over its meaning, the notion of a conceptual scheme is pervasive in Anglo‐American philosophy, particularly amongst those who call themselves ‘conceptual relativists’. In this paper, I identify three different ways to understand conceptual schemes. I argue that the two most common models, deriving from Kant and Quine, are flawed, and, in addition, useless for the relativist. Instead, I urge adoption of a ‘neo‐Kantian’, broadly Wittgensteinian model, which, it is ‘ argued, is immune from Davidsonian objections to the very idea of a scheme.