...it would in no sense be a genuine reproach to philosophy if there weren't any single, absolutely right account of things, but rather a large number of alternative accounts, of varying excellence, which illuminate the 'facts' from different angles. For where usage is settled, and we have only to apply it to empirical material, it is impossible to talk very differently without also talking contradictorily. But where usage is unsettled and creative, as it always is and must be in philosophy, there are far fewer cases of such grosss incompatibility. We should, perhaps, no more regret that things can be spoken of metaphysically in a large number of distinct manners, than that things can be painted in a large number of distinct styles, or lived in a large number of distinct and different ways ("Values in Speaking," Language, Mind and Value, p. 126-7)