The practice of history involves translation because it concerns the re-expression of that which is past in the language of the present. The importance of Davidson's approach as outlined in this chapter lies in his presentation of an argument that there can be no 'intelligible' account of either partial or complete 'failure' of translation. Davidson's position is an example of a predominant philosophical strategy that is premised on rational recovery and in which the possibility of truth and meaning are in some sense outside language and therefore what is recovered and translated is a meaning or truth that then comes to be re-expressed in another language. Davidson's argument against the third dogma takes place in relation to an attempt to establish the connection between, first language and related conceptual scheme and second language and experience. The nature of the interconnection between universality, metaphysics, and philosophical anthropology provides the frame within which Davidson's position is advanced.