ABSTRACT
The naturalistic approach is inherently reductionist, in that it seeks to explain the truth-relevant content of all truth claims in terms of certain basic states of affairs, from which all reflexive indexical elements and negation are specifically banned. Indeed, not only do the people end up with an inadequate account of truth conditions but find ourselves in an additional predicament of having to choose between two different explanatory accounts: one relativistic, the other evolutionary, both of which are fraught with problems. Nevertheless the socio-historical approach, whilst defective in both its versions, highlights an important aspect of truth claims which is largely ignored or neglected by the other two types of approach, and indirectly helps to complete the logical jig-saw of truth conditions. The merit of Protagoras' arguments is thus to have shown that the issue of objectivity cannot be 'resolved' at the price of sacrificing the indexical features of truth claims.
