Abstract: Parts of Quine’s philosophy of logic has been revitalized in the recent debate about anti-exceptionalism. According to both the Quinean naturalist and the anti-exceptionalist, logic is revisable, and the revisions come about through methods of theory-choice not unlike those of the sciences. But there are also important differences between contemporary anti-exceptionalism and naturalism. We compare the Quinean method of theory-choice with anti-exceptionalist alternatives, and argue that the latter better supports existing revisionary arguments.