 In the context of ethical non-cognitivism, one possible response to the apparent dilemma is to distinguish between a deflationary account of truth and a deflationary account of truth-aptitude (cf. Jackson, et al. 1994). By accepting an inflationary account of the latter, one can claim that ethical statements fail the robust criteria of “truth-aptitude” (reidentified in terms of expression of belief), even if a deflationary view of truth still allows the application of the truth predicate to them, via instances of (ES). In the case of  vagueness,  one might adopt epistemicism about it and claim that vague sentences actually have truth-values, we just can’t know them (cf. Williamson 1994. For an alternative, see Field 1994b).