Cicero's philosophical works are a rich source for the understanding of Hellenistic philosophy, and his Academic Books are of critical importance for the study of ancient epistemology, especially the central debate between the Academic sceptics and the Stoics. This volume makes Cicero's challenging work accessible to philosophers and historians of philosophy and represents the best current work in both fields. The ten papers published here are the work of leading authorities from North America, England and Europe; they were presented and discussed at the seventh Symposium Hellenisticum at Utrecht, August 1995, and deal with every aspect of the Academic Books, historical, literary and philosophical. Several papers make major contributions to the understanding of ancient scepticism and sceptical arguments, to the role of Socrates in later Greek thought, to the history of the Academy as an institution, and to the philosophical stance of Cicero himself.

The themes of the essays in Argumentation Theory and the Rhetoric of Assent all coalesce around the general question: "When, if ever, is assent justified?" The question immediate triggers complex and multifaceted considerations of argument and, ultimately, power. In parsing out the nature of assent, the essays take divers approaches: aesthetic and symbolist, rationalistic and formalistic, field theory, various conceptualizations of a public sphere, etc. Together, they offer an insightful exploration of an exciting new terrain argumentation studies.

This book brings together essays that demonstrate the art of argument evaluation. The essays apply a variety of theoretical approaches to specific, historically-situated arguments in order to render a specific normative judgment. By bringing to bear knowledge of argumentation theory along with expertise pertaining to the specific arguments under investigation, this book illustrates the utility of argument evaluation as a discrete mode of scholarly engagement.

The view that persons are entitled to respect because of their moral agency is commonplace in contemporary moral theory. What exactly this respect entails, however, is far less uncontroversial. In this book, Van der Rijt argues powerfully that this respect for persons’ moral agency must also encompass respect for their subjective moral judgments – even when these judgments can be shown to be fundamentally flawed. Van der Rijt scrutinises the role persons’ subjective moral judgments play within the context of coercion and domination. His fresh, original analysis of Kant’s third formulation of the Categorical Imperative reveals how these judgments are intimately connected to a person’s dignity. The result is an insightful new account of coercion, a novel Kantian reformulation of the republican notion of non-domination and a compelling, innovative argument in favour of retributive justice. "In this admirably clear and insightful work, Van der Rijt develops an original account of coercion and dignity. On the basis of his analysis of the relation between these two concepts, he also provides an intriguing new angle on the nature of republicanism. I recommend this book to anyone interested in freedom and power and their roles in normative political theory." Ian Carter - University of Pavia "In this carefully argued and original study Jan-Willem van der Rijt offers an analysis of coercion, a broadly Kantian argument that coercion is an affront to dignity, and an illuminating contrast with Philip Pettit's republicanism. A most welcome contribution." Thomas E. Hill, Jr. - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill "Jan-Willem van der Rijt has written a well argued, original book that will prove to be extremely helpful for the philosophical inquiry of the relationship between coercion and human dignity as well as for the assessment of republicanism and its consequences." Ralf Stoecker - University of Potsdam

This volume presents the best scholarship from the 19th National Communication Association/American Forensic Association Conference on Argumentation, which took place July 30-August 2, 2015, at Cliff Lodge, Snowbird Resort, in Alta, Utah. The Alta Conference, first held in 1979, is the oldest conference in argumentation studies in the world and biennially brings together a lively group of scholars, representing a variety of countries, with diverse perspectives on the theory and practice of argument. The essays in Recovering Argument invite reflection upon and reconsideration of argumentation’s legacy, present status, and potential roles in social, cultural, and political life. Readers will encounter essays that treat the relationship between argumentation and memory, historical approaches to argumentation, the vitality of public and interpersonal argument, argument’s role in leadership, discursive and presentational forms of argument, and the challenges of difference. Readers also will find these topics addressed from a variety of historical, social-scientific, and critical-interpretive perspectives.