ABSTRACT
Russell Goodman's elegant and erudite chapter locates me in the “pluralist” tradition, and I am happy with that placement. I greatly appreciate his compliments (especially the one about my “energetic happiness”), and I have learned from his account of the history of pluralism. What I want to do in this comment is (1) make two important corrections to his account of my views; (2) distinguish my pluralism from Nelson Goodman's; and then (3) comment on a few of Goodman's remarks, in the order in which they appear in his lecture.
