Books
Epictetus’s Encheiridion: A New Translation and Guide to Stoic Ethics
With William O. Stephens. Bloomsbury (2023)
For anyone approaching the Encheiridion of Epictetus for the first time, this book provides a comprehensive guide to understanding a complex philosophical text. Including a full translation and clear explanatory commentaries, Epictetus's 'Encheiridion' introduces readers to a hugely influential work of Stoic philosophy. Scott Aikin and William O. Stephens unravel the core themes of Stoic ethics found within this ancient handbook. Focusing on the core themes of self-control, seeing things as they are, living according to nature, owning one's roles and fulfilling the responsibilities that those roles entail, the authors elucidate the extremely challenging ideas in Epictetus's brisk chapters. Divided into five distinct parts, this book provides readers with:
A new translation of the Encheiridion by William O. Stephens. A new introduction to ancient Stoicism, its system of concepts, and the ancient figures who shaped it. A fresh treatment of the notorious and counter-intuitive 'Stoic paradoxes'. An accessible overview of the origin and historical context of the Encheiridion. Detailed commentaries on each chapter of the Encheiridion that clarify its recurring themes and highlight their interconnections. Careful attention to the presentation of the arguments embedded in Epictetus's aphoristic style. A thoughtful discussion of serious criticisms of Epictetus's Stoicism and replies to these objections.
Written with clarity and authority, Epictetus's 'Encheiridion' provides a foundation from which readers can understand this important text and engage with the fundamental questions of Stoic philosophy and ethics. This guide will aid teachers of Epictetus, students encountering Stoicism for the first time, and readers seeking a greater understanding of Stoic ethics.
Straw Man Arguments: A Study in Fallacy Theory
With John Casey. Bloomsbury (2022)
This book analyses the straw man fallacy and its deployment in philosophical reasoning. While commonly invoked in both academic dialogue and public discourse, it has not until now received the attention it deserves as a rhetorical device.
Scott Aikin and John Casey propose that straw manning essentially consists in expressing distorted representations of one's critical interlocutor. To this end, the straw man comprises three dialectical forms, and not only the one that is usually suggested: the straw man, the weak man and the hollow man. Moreover, they demonstrate that straw manning is unique among fallacies as it has no particular logical form in itself, because it is an instance of inappropriate meta-argument, or argument about arguments. They discuss the importance of the onlooking audience to the successful deployment of the straw man, reasoning that the existence of an audience complicates the dialectical boundaries of argument.
Providing a lively, provocative and thorough analysis of the straw man fallacy, this book will appeal to postgraduates and researchers alike, working in a range of fields including fallacies, rhetoric, argumentation theory and informal logic.
Political Argument in a Polarized Age
With Robert B. Talisse. Polity (2020)
From obnoxious public figures to online trolling and accusations of “fake news”, almost no one seems able to disagree without hostility. But polite discord sounds farfetched when issues are so personal and fundamental that those on opposing sides appear to have no common ground. How do you debate the “enemy”?
Philosophers Scott Aikin and Robert Talisse show that disagreeing civilly, even with your sworn enemies, is a crucial part of democracy. Rejecting the popular view that civility requires a polite and concessive attitude, they argue that our biggest challenge is not remaining calm in the face of an opponent, but rather ensuring that our political arguments actually address those on the opposing side. Too often politicians and pundits merely simulate political debate, offering carefully structured caricatures of their opponents. These simulations mimic political argument in a way designed to convince citizens that those with whom they disagree are not worth talking to.
Good democracy thrives off conflict, but until we learn the difference between real and simulated arguments we will be doomed to speak at cross-purposes. Aikin and Talisse provide a crash course in political rhetoric for the concerned citizen, showing readers why understanding the structure of arguments is just as vital for a healthy democracy as debate over facts and values. But there’s a sting in the tail - no sooner have we learned rhetorical techniques for better disagreement than these techniques themselves become weapons with which to ignore our enemies, as accusations like “false equivalence” and “ad hominem” are used to silence criticism. Civility requires us to be eternally vigilant to the ways we disagree.
Pragmatism, Pluralism, and the Nature of Philosophy
With Robert B. Talisse. Routledge (2018)
For the past fifteen years, Aikin and Talisse have been working collaboratively on a new vision of American pragmatism, one which sees pragmatism as a living and developing philosophical idiom that originates in the work of the "classical" pragmatisms of Charles Peirce, William James, and John Dewey, uninterruptedly develops through the later 20th Century pragmatists (C. I. Lewis, Wilfrid Sellars, Nelson Goodman, W. V. O. Quine), and continues through the present day. According to Aikin and Talisse, pragmatism is fundamentally a metaphilosophical proposal – a methodological suggestion for carrying inquiry forward amidst ongoing deep disagreement over the aims, limitations, and possibilities of philosophy. This conception of pragmatism not only runs contrary to the dominant self-understanding among cotemporary philosophers who identify with the classical pragmatists, it also holds important implications for pragmatist philosophy. In particular, Aikin and Talisse show that their version of pragmatism involves distinctive claims about epistemic justification, moral disagreement, democratic citizenship, and the conduct of inquiry. The chapters combine detailed engagements with the history and development of pragmatism with original argumentation aimed at a philosophical audience beyond pragmatism.
Evidentialism and the Will to Believe
Bloomsbury (2014)
Work on the norms of belief in epistemology regularly starts with two touchstone essays: W.K. Clifford's "The Ethics of Belief" and William James's "The Will to Believe." Discussing the central themes from these seminal essays, Evidentialism and the Will to Believe explores the history of the ideas governing evidentialism.
As well as Clifford's argument from the examples of the shipowner, the consequences of credulity and his defence against skepticism, this book tackles James's conditions for a genuine option and the structure of the will to believe case as a counter-example to Clifford's evidentialism. Exploring the question of whether James's case successfully counters Clifford's evidentialist rule for belief, this study captures the debate between those who hold that one should proportion belief to evidence and those who hold that the evidentialist norm is too restrictive.
More than a sustained explication of the essays, it also surveys recent epistemological arguments to evidentialism. But it is by bringing Clifford and James into fruitful conversation for the first time that this study presents a clearer history of the issues and provides an important reconstruction of the notion of evidence in contemporary epistemology.
Why We Argue (And How We Should)
With Robert B. Talisse. Routledge (2014)
Second Edition (2019)
Why We Argue (And How We Should): A Guide to Political Disagreement in an Age of Unreason presents an accessible and engaging introduction to the theory of argument, with special emphasis on the way argument works in public political debate. The authors develop a view according to which proper argument is necessary for one’s individual cognitive health; this insight is then expanded to the collective health of one’s society. Proper argumentation, then, is seen to play a central role in a well-functioning democracy.
Written in a lively style and filled with examples drawn from the real world of contemporary politics, and questions following each chapter to encourage discussion, Why We Argue (And How We Should) reads like a guide for the participation in, and maintenance of, modern democracy. An excellent student resource for courses in critical thinking, political philosophy, and related fields, Why We Argue (And How We Should) is an important contribution to reasoned debate.
Epistemology and the Regress Problem
Routledge (2011)
In the last decade, the familiar problem of the regress of reasons has returned to prominent consideration in epistemology. And with the return of the problem, evaluation of the options available for its solution is begun anew. Reason’s regress problem, roughly put, is that if one has good reasons to believe something, one must have good reason to hold those reasons are good. And for those reasons, one must have further reasons to hold they are good, and so a regress of reasons looms. In this new study, Aikin presents a full case for infinitism as a response to the problem of the regress of reasons. Infinitism is the view that one must have a non-terminating chain of reasons in order to be justified. The most defensible form of infinitism, he argues, is that of a mixed theory – that is, epistemic infinitism must be consistent with and integrate other solutions to the regress problem.
Reasonable Atheism
With Robert B. Talisse. Prometheus Books (2011)
A recent poll from the University of Minnesota finds that atheists are America's least trusted social group. Perhaps compounding this negative impression is the attack-dog persona taken on in the past decade by the "New Atheists." Not only have they been quite public about their disbelief, but they've also stridently lambasted religious belief generally in a number of bestselling books. Disturbed by this negative public perception and the deterioration in the tone of open debate, the authors of this eminently reasonable work attempt to introduce a note of civility and rational clarity. To both religious believers and fellow atheists they counsel a measured approach that combines serious intellectual engagement with respect for the reasonableness of the other side's position. The heart of the book is the authors' moral case for atheism. Atheism, they contend, manifests a decidedly moral concern for others and their wellbeing. The authors further argue that atheism is driven by the kinds of moral considerations that should be familiar to all religious believers. Atheists are motivated by a moral concern for others, a desire to alleviate suffering and combat evil, and an appreciation for the value of life, freedom, and responsibility. In the end, the authors make not only a compelling case for atheism but also for the value and necessity of mutual respect in a democratic society composed of diverse citizens.
Pragmatism: A Guide for the Perplexed
With Robert B. Talisse. Continuum Books (2008)
The recent revival of interest in pragmatism has reintroduced into mainstream philosophy the insights and arguments of great American philosophers such as C.S. Peirce, William James and John Dewey. But it has also led to the use of the term 'pragmatism' in a huge variety of contexts, such that students and readers can find this fascinating subject confusing.
Pragmatism: A Guide for the Perplexed seeks to dispel some of the ambiguity surrounding the term 'pragmatism'. The book offers a clear and thorough account of this important philosophical movement. Thematically structured, it lays out the historical development and surveys the key thinkers. Crucially, it concentrates on the ways in which pragmatists, both contemporary and historical, have attempted to address some of the most important problems in philosophy. Geared towards the specific requirements of students who need to have a sound understanding of pragmatism, the book serves as an ideal companion to study of this most important and influential of movements.
Edited Volumes
The Routledge Companion to Pragmatism
Co-edited with Robert B. Talisse. Routledge (2022)
The Routledge Companion to Pragmatism offers 44 cutting-edge chapters—written specifically for this volume by an international team of distinguished researchers—that assess the past, present, and future of pragmatism. Going beyond the exposition of canonical texts and figures, the collection presents pragmatism as a living philosophical idiom that continues to devise promising theses in contemporary debates. The chapters are organized into four major parts:
- Pragmatism’s history and figures
- Pragmatism and plural traditions
- Pragmatism’s reach
- Pragmatism’s relevance
Each chapter provides up-to-date research tools for philosophers, students, and others who wish to locate pragmatist options in their contemporary research fields. As a whole, the volume demonstrates that the vitality of pragmatism lies in its ability to build upon, and transcend, the ideas and arguments of its founders. When seen in its full diversity, pragmatism emerges as one of the most successful and influential philosophical movements in Western philosophy.
Contemporary Stoicism
Special issue of Symposion (2022) 9:1. Co-edited with William O. Stephens
Interest in Stoicism has been on the rise in recent years. To start, there are the popular and practical applications of the tradition. Blogs, YouTube channels, and popular publications explaining the insights of the school and showing its connection to a variety of other issues (whether to material minimalism, to athletic training, to psychological well-being) abound. Moreover, scholarly interest in the school is as strong as ever. Stoicism's development, its theoretical approach to the emotions, its model for duty and virtue, its anti-skeptical tools, and its model for intellectual aspirationalism are seen as rich sites for philosophical reflection. This is a period of Stoic renaissance.
Epistemology’s Ancient Origins and Contemporary Development
Special issue of Logos and Episteme (2019) 10:1
Developments in epistemology are philosophically interesting for two reasons. The first is simply that they are advancements in the analysis of a core set of concepts--knowledge, belief, truth, and reason. Getting clear about these things is important just as we should be interested in getting clear about justice, the moral good, beauty, and meaning. These are concepts that reflective humans want to possess and use correctly. They are part of our normative lives, and so we do better when we are right about the concepts and their applications. The second reason why epistemology is philosophically interesting is that developments in our account of knowledge influence how we pursue our other philosophical accounts. So, one's story of why one is right about, say, justice (and how others may be wrong) is one that depends on one's account of what it is to be right about those concepts and how one can demonstrate that. Epistemology, then, is not only of first-order philosophical interest, but it is of concern for second-order philosophical reasons. Views on the nature of truth and the acquisition of knowledge bears on how one sees the breadth of philosophically relevant truths and the methods of one's competitors.
Skeptical Issues in Political Epistemology.
Special issue of Symposion (2018) 5:2. Co-edited With Tempest Henning
Political epistemology, like most domains of philosophical research, is not only full of controversy regarding issues within the domain, but is full of controversy regarding what the domain, properly, is. On the one hand, political epistemology can be the philosophical study of how we can come to know and productively share our views about some set of political truths. So, like the moral epistemology of moral truths, political epistemology is devoted to determining how one might know whether some political principle is a good one or that one form of government is more just than another. On the other hand, political epistemology is taken to be about the interplay between political arrangements and the knowledge citizens of those polities have and can share. In essence, the question here is how particular political arrangements allow us to be sensitive to some reasons or evidence, and how others produce other sensitivities (or insensitivities). This duality between the two programs, effectively between the epistemology of political truths and the pol
The Regress Problem: Meta-theory, Development, and Criticism
Special issue of Metaphilosophy. (2014) 45:2. Co-edited with Jeanne Peijnenburg
This introduction presents selected proceedings of a two-day meeting on the regress problem, sponsored by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) and hosted by Vanderbilt University in October 2013, along with other submitted essays. Three forms of research on the regress problem are distinguished: metatheoretical, developmental, and critical work.
The Pragmatism Reader: From Peirce to the Present
Co-edited with Robert B. Talisse. Princeton University Press (2011)
The Pragmatism Reader is the essential anthology of this important philosophical movement. Each selection featured here is a key writing by a leading pragmatist thinker, and represents a distinctively pragmatist approach to a core philosophical problem. The collection includes work by pragmatism’s founders, Charles Peirce, William James, and John Dewey, as well as seminal writings by mid-twentieth-century pragmatists such as Sidney Hook, C. I. Lewis, Nelson Goodman, Rudolf Carnap, Wilfrid Sellars, and W.V.O. Quine. This reader also includes the most important work in contemporary pragmatism by philosophers like Susan Haack, Cornel West, Hilary Putnam, Richard Rorty, Cheryl Misak, and Robert Brandom. Each selection is a stand-alone piece—not an excerpt or book chapter—and each is presented fully unabridged.
The Pragmatism Reader challenges the notion that pragmatism fell into a midcentury decline and was dormant until the advent of “neopragmatism” in the 1980s. This comprehensive anthology reveals a rich and highly influential tradition running unbroken through twentieth-century philosophy and continuing today. It shows how American pragmatist philosophers have contributed to leading philosophical debates about truth, meaning, knowledge, experience, belief, existence, justification, and freedom.
- Covers pragmatist philosophy from its origins to today
- Features key writings by the leading pragmatist thinkers
- Demonstrates the continuity and enduring influence of pragmatism
- Challenges prevailing notions about pragmatism
- Includes only stand-alone pieces, completely unabridged
- Reflects the full range of pragmatist themes, arguments, concerns, and commitments
Thinking about Logic: Classic Essays
Co-edited with Steven M. Cahn and Robert B. Talisse. Westview Press (2010)
In the last decade, the familiar problem of the regress of reasons has returned to prominent consideration in epistemology. And with the return of the problem, evaluation of the options available for its solution is begun anew. Reason’s regress problem, roughly put, is that if one has good reasons to believe something, one must have good reason to hold those reasons are good. And for those reasons, one must have further reasons to hold they are good, and so a regress of reasons looms. In this new study, Aikin presents a full case for infinitism as a response to the problem of the regress of reasons. Infinitism is the view that one must have a non-terminating chain of reasons in order to be justified. The most defensible form of infinitism, he argues, is that of a mixed theory – that is, epistemic infinitism must be consistent with and integrate other solutions to the regress problem.