This acclaimed anthology is ideal for newcomers to aesthetics or philosophy of art and includes new sections on pornography and erotica and societies without art, as well as new essays and revised introductions throughout.

Arguing about Art, 2nd Editionis an expanded and revised new edition of this highly acclaimed anthology. This lively collection presents twenty-seven readings in a clear and accessible format discussing the major themes and arguments in aesthetics. Alex Neill and Aaron Ridley's introductions provide a balanced account of each topic and highlight the important questions that are raised in the readings. The new sections of the book are: The Art of Food; Rock Music and Culture; Enjoying Horror; Art and Morality; and Public Art. In addition, many of the introductions have been updated and each section includes suggestions for further reading.

Within this edition, five new sections have been added: on interpretation, objectivity, gardening, horror and morality and many of the introductions have been updated. The book should appeal to students of art history, literature, and cultural studies as well as philosophy.

This is an anthology covering 11 topics or debates in the philosophy of art, some of which have only recently emerged, whilst others have been debated for centuries. Each chapter contains two or more articles on the topic, preceded by a short introduction to the topic and followed by a select bibliography. A wide range of art forms are covered, as is the topic of appreciating nature.

Based on five years of classroom experimentation, The Open Hand presents a highly practical yet transformational philosophy of teaching argumentative writing. In his course Arguing as an Art of Peace, Barry Kroll uses the open hand to represent an alternative approach to argument, asking students to argue in a way that promotes harmony rather than divisiveness and avoiding conventional conflict-based approaches. Kroll cultivates a bodily investigation of noncombative argument, offering direct pedagogical strategies anchored in three modalities of learning—conceptual-procedural, kinesthetic, and contemplative—and projects, activities, assignments, informal responses, and final papers for students. Kinesthetic exercises derived from martial arts and contemplative meditation and mindfulness practices are key to the approach, with Kroll specifically using movement as a physical analogy for tactics of arguing. Collaboration, mediation, and empathy are important yet overlooked values in communicative exchange. This practical, engaging, and accessible guide for teachers contains clear examples and compelling discussions of pedagogical strategies that teach students not only how to write persuasively but also how to deal with personal conflict in their daily lives.

Why do some attempts to conclude alliance treaties end in failure? From the inability of European powers to form an alliance that would stop Hitler in the 1930s, to the present inability of Ukraine to join NATO, states frequently attempt but fail to form alliance treaties. In Arguing about Alliances, Paul Poast sheds new light on the purpose of alliance treaties by recognizing that such treaties come from negotiations, and that negotiations can end in failure. In a book that bridges Stephen Walt's Origins of Alliance and Glenn Snyder's Alliance Politics, two classic works on alliances, Poast identifies two conditions that result in non-agreement: major incompatibilities in the internal war plans of the participants, and attractive alternatives to a negotiated agreement for various parties to the negotiations. As a result, Arguing about Alliances focuses on a group of states largely ignored by scholars: states that have attempted to form alliance treaties but failed. Poast suggests that to explain the outcomes of negotiations, specifically how they can end without agreement, we must pay particular attention to the wartime planning and coordinating functions of alliance treaties. Through his exploration of the outcomes of negotiations from European alliance negotiations between 1815 and 1945, Poast offers a typology of alliance treaty negotiations and establishes what conditions are most likely to stymie the attempt to formalize recognition of common national interests.

Have you ever walked away from an argument and suddenly thought of all the brilliant things you wish you'd said? Do you avoid certain family members and colleagues because of bitter, festering tension that you can't figure out how to address? Now, finally, there's a solution: a new framework that frees you from the trap of unproductive conflict and pointless arguing forever. If the threat of raised voices, emotional outbursts, and public discord makes you want to hide under the conference room table, you're not alone. Conflict, or the fear of it, can be exhausting. But as this powerful book argues, conflict doesn't have to be unpleasant. In fact, properly channeled, conflict can be the most valuable tool we have at our disposal for deepening relationships, solving problems, and coming up with new ideas. As the mastermind behind some of the highest-performing teams at Amazon, Twitter, and Slack, Buster Benson spent decades facilitating hard conversations in stressful environments. In this book, Buster reveals the psychological underpinnings of awkward, unproductive conflict and the critical habits anyone can learn to avoid it. Armed with a deeper understanding of how arguments, you'll be able to: Remain confident when you're put on the spot Diffuse tense moments with a few strategic questions Facilitate creative solutions even when your team has radically different perspectives Why Are We Yelling will shatter your assumptions about what makes arguments productive. You'll find yourself having fewer repetitive, predictable fights once you're empowered to identify your biases, listen with an open mind, and communicate well.

In De Gustibus Peter Kivy deals with a question that has never been fully addressed by philosophers of art: why do we argue about art? We argue about the 'facts' of the world either to influence people's behaviour or simply to get them to see what we take to be the truth about the world. We argue over ethical matters, if we are ethical 'realists, ' because we think we are arguing about 'facts' in the world. And we argue about ethics, if we are 'emotivists, ' or are now what are called 'expressionists, ' which is to say, people who think matters of ethics are simply matters of 'attitude, ' to influence the behaviour of others. But why should we argue about works of art? There are no 'actions' we wish to motivate. Whether I think Bach is greater than Beethoven and you think the opposite, why should it matter to either of us to convince the other? This is a question that philosophers have never faced. Kivy claims here that we argue over taste because we think, mistakenly or not, that we are arguing over matters of fact.

A philosopher makes the case for thinking of works of art as tools for investigating ourselves In his new book, Strange Tools: Art and Human Nature, the philosopher and cognitive scientist Alva Noë raises a number of profound questions: What is art? Why do we value art as we do? What does art reveal about our nature? Drawing on philosophy, art history, and cognitive science, and making provocative use of examples from all three of these fields, Noë offers new answers to such questions. He also shows why recent efforts to frame questions about art in terms of neuroscience and evolutionary biology alone have been and will continue to be unsuccessful.

2017 Lowy Institute Media Lecture