This article introduces a dilemma regarding conceptual schemes and suggests a solution. The dilemma is about whether there are conceptual schemes or not. There are good reasons for maintaining either position. There must be conceptual schemes because theory is underdetermined by evidence. And there cannot be conceptual schemes because Davidson has given an almost unassailable argument against it. I resolve the dilemma by arguing that Davidson’s argument is based on a false dilemma generated by too strong a principle of charity. This makes space for conceptual schemes without sacrificing the intelligibility of any.

中文翻译：

---

组织，拟合，预测

本文介绍了有关概念方案的两难处境并提出了解决方案。困境在于是否存在概念方案。维持这两个职位都有充分的理由。必须要有概念上的方案，因为理论是由证据所决定的。而且不可能有概念性的方案，因为戴维森对此提出了几乎毫无争议的论点。我通过辩解说戴维森的论点是基于过于强大的慈善原则所产生的错误困境而解决的。这为概念方案留出了空间，而又不牺牲任何方案的可理解性。