This volume provides discussions of both the concept of responsibility and of punishment, and of both individual and collective responsibility. It provides in-depth Socratic and Kantian bases for a new version of retributivism, and defends that version against the main criticisms that have been raised against retributivism in general. It includes chapters on criminal recidivism and capital punishment, as well as one on forgiveness, apology and punishment that is congruent with the basic precepts of the new retributivism defended therein. Finally, chapters on corporate responsibility and punishment are included, with a closing chapter on holding the U.S. accountable for its most recent invasion and occupation of Iraq. The book is well-focused but also presents the widest ranging set of topics of any book of its kind as it demonstrates how the concepts of responsibility and punishment apply to some of the most important problems of our time.

"This is one of the best books on punishment, and the Fourth Edition continues its tradition of excellence. The book connects punishment importantly to moral responsibility and desert, and it is comprehensive in its scope, both addressing abstract, theoretical issues and applied issues as well. The topics treated include collective responsibility, apology, forgiveness, capital punishment, and war crimes. Highly recommended."-John Martin Fischer, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, University of California, Riverside."

What is terrorism? Can it ever be the right thing to do? Who is really responsible for terrorism? Should governments never negotiate with terrorists? And how can terrorism be stopped? Terrorism: A Philosophical Analysis is a unique book on terrorism that openly, rationally and passionately delves into what underlies terrorism, what in some cases justifies it on ethical grounds, and how terrorism might be dealt with successfully. Rather than assuming from the start a particular point of view about terrorism, this book uniquely engages the reader in a series of critical discussions that unveil the ethical problems underlying terrorism. A must-read for everyone interested in understanding the depths of terrorism.

Race, Rights, and Justice explores questions of the nature of law and constitutional interpretation, international law and global justice, and the nature, function, and importance of rights each from a perspective that takes seriously the realities of race and racism. After a critical assessment of various contemporary theories of law is provided, a new theory of legal interpretation is set forth and defended. The respective words of Immanuel Kant and H.L.A. Hart on the possibility and desirability of international law are carefully explicated. Following this, Race, Rights, and Justice defends John Rawls' Law of Peoples from the cosmopolitan liberal critique of it. The nature and importance of rights, both individual and collective, are clarified while correcting some political philosophies that have propagated confused rhetoric about rights. And the collective right to humanitarian intervention is investigated philosophically in terms of the recent problems in Colombia, with surprisingly original results. While the methodology of this book is thoroughly analytical, philosophically speaking, some of the conclusions drawn are substantially original, infusing the facts of race and racism into mainstream matters of philosophy of law.

"In this collection of essays, J. Angelo Corlett continues his important work of bringing the perspective of indigenous peoples, and more generally of race, into mainstream philosophical debates about justice and rights. Corlett's book also has very valuable insights into the nature of international law that will greatly enrich our contemporary debates." (Larry May, Washington University in St. Louis, USA)

"Angelo Corlett is a prolific writer whose work is invariably stimulating, provocative, and insightful. Race, Rights, and Justice is an important addition to the oeuvre. Corlett is not afraid to tackle big problems, and big names. See, for example, his scathing criticisms of Bork and Scalia on constitutional interpretation." (Burleigh T. Wilkins, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA)

J. Angelo Corlett's new book, Interpreting Plato Socratically continues the critical discussion of the Platonic Question where Corlett's book, Interpreting Plato's Dialogues concluded. New arguments in favor of the Mouthpiece Interpretation of Plato's works are considered and shown to be fallacious, as are new objections to some competing approaches to Plato's works. The Platonic Question is the problem of how to approach and interpret Plato's writings most of which are dialogues. How, if at all, can Plato's beliefs, doctrines, theories and such be extracted from dialogues where there is no direct indication from Plato that his own views are even to be found therein? Most philosophers of Plato attempt to decipher from Plato's texts seemingly all manner of ideas expressed by Socrates which they then attribute to Plato. They seek to ascribe to Plato particular views about justice, art, love, virtue, knowledge, and the like because, they believe, Socrates is Plato's mouthpiece through the dialogues. But is such an approach justified? What are the arguments in favor of such an approach? Is there a viable alternative approach to Plato's dialogues? In this rigorous account of the dominant approach to Plato's dialogues, there is no room left for reasonable doubt about the problematic reasons given for the notion that Plato's dialogues reveal either Plato's or Socrates' beliefs, doctrines or theories about substantive philosophical matters. Corlett's approach to Plato's dialogues is applied to a variety of passages throughout Plato's works on a wide range of topics concerning justice. In-depth discussions of themes such as legal obligation, punishment and compensatory justice are clarified and with some surprising results. Plato's works serve as a rich source of philosophical thinking about such matters. A central question in today's Platonic studies is whether Socrates, or any other protagonist in the dialogues, presents views that the author wanted to assert or defend. Professor Corlett offers a detailed defense of his view that the role of Socrates is to raise questions rather than to provide the author's answers to them. This defense is timely as intellectual historians consider the part played by Academic scholars centuries after Plato in systematizing Platonism. J. J. Mulhern, University of Pennsylvania

An indispensable source for those seriously interested in some rigorous assessments of the ideas of America's two most popular political philosophers, this volume of essays covers a wide range of topics, some engaging each other in their analyses of particular Rawlsian or Nozickian themes. The bibliography provides for the reader the most comprehensive list of primary and secondary literature of philosophical works on Rawls and Nozick. This collection of recent essays brings the student up-to-date concerning some of the more recent developments and assessments of Rawlsian and Nozickian ideas.

This volume presents a clear-headed defense of retributivism against several long-standing criticisms. In the end, a viable version of retributivism emerges as one which withstands more criticism than competing theories of responsibility and punishment. Extending the problem of wrong doing to collectives and compensation, Corlett explores the matter of reparations for past wrongs in the case of the crimes committed against Native Americans by the United States Government. No other philosophical work on responsibility and punishment exhibits this breadth of scope, as it delves deeply into particular concerns with retributivism, responsibility, and certain areas of compensation. Academicians and professionals in ethics, moral, social, political, and legal philosophy are likely to benefit from this analytical treatment of responsibility and punishment.

This volume provides discussions of both the concept of responsibility and of punishment, and of both individual and collective responsibility. It provides in-depth Socratic and Kantian bases for a new version of retributivism, and defends that version against the main criticisms that have been raised against retributivism in general. It includes chapters on criminal recidivism and capital punishment, as well as one on forgiveness, apology and punishment that is congruent with the basic precepts of the new retributivism defended therein. Finally, chapters on corporate responsibility and punishment are included, with a closing chapter on holding the U.S. accountable for its most recent invasion and occupation of Iraq. The book is well-focused but also presents the widest ranging set of topics of any book of its kind as it demonstrates how the concepts of responsibility and punishment apply to some of the most important problems of our time. "This is one of the best books on punishment, and the Fourth Edition continues its tradition of excellence. The book connects punishment importantly to moral responsibility and desert, and it is comprehensive in its scope, both addressing abstract, theoretical issues and applied issues as well. The topics treated include collective responsibility, apology, forgiveness, capital punishment, and war crimes. Highly recommended."-John Martin Fischer, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, University of California, Riverside.

Race, Rights, and Justice explores questions of the nature of law and constitutional interpretation, international law and global justice, and the nature, function, and importance of rights each from a perspective that takes seriously the realities of race and racism. After a critical assessment of various contemporary theories of law is provided, a new theory of legal interpretation is set forth and defended. The respective words of Immanuel Kant and H.L.A. Hart on the possibility and desirability of international law are carefully explicated. Following this, Race, Rights, and Justice defends John Rawls' Law of Peoples from the cosmopolitan liberal critique of it. The nature and importance of rights, both individual and collective, are clarified while correcting some political philosophies that have propagated confused rhetoric about rights. And the collective right to humanitarian intervention is investigated philosophically in terms of the recent problems in Colombia, with surprisingly original results. While the methodology of this book is thoroughly analytical, philosophically speaking, some of the conclusions drawn are substantially original, infusing the facts of race and racism into mainstream matters of philosophy of law.

"In this collection of essays, J. Angelo Corlett continues his important work of bringing the perspective of indigenous peoples, and more generally of race, into mainstream philosophical debates about justice and rights. Corlett's book also has very valuable insights into the nature of international law that will greatly enrich our contemporary debates." (Larry May, Washington University in St. Louis, USA)

"Angelo Corlett is a prolific writer whose work is invariably stimulating, provocative, and insightful. Race, Rights, and Justice is an important addition to the oeuvre. Corlett is not afraid to tackle big problems, and big names. See, for example, his scathing criticisms of Bork and Scalia on constitutional interpretation." (Burleigh T. Wilkins, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA)

This is a unique book on terrorism that openly, rationally and passionately delves into what underlies terrorism, what in some cases justifies it on ethical grounds, and how terrorism might be dealt with successfully. Rather than assuming from the start a particular point of view about terrorism, this book uniquely engages the reader in a series of critical discussions that unveil the ethical problems underlying terrorism. A must-read for everyone interested in understanding the depths of terrorism.

An indispensable source for those seriously interested in some rigorous assessments of the ideas of America's two most popular political philosophers, this volume of essays covers a wide range of topics, some engaging each other in their analyses of particular Rawlsian or Nozickian themes. The bibliography provides for the reader the most comprehensive list of primary and secondary literature of philosophical works on Rawls and Nozick. This collection of recent essays brings the student up-to-date concerning some of the more recent developments and assessments of Rawlsian and Nozickian ideas.

J. Angelo Corlett's new book, Interpreting Plato Socratically continues the critical discussion of the Platonic Question where Corlett's book, Interpreting Plato's Dialogues concluded. New arguments in favor of the Mouthpiece Interpretation of Plato's works are considered and shown to be fallacious, as are new objections to some competing approaches to Plato's works. The Platonic Question is the problem of how to approach and interpret Plato's writings most of which are dialogues. How, if at all, can Plato's beliefs, doctrines, theories and such be extracted from dialogues where there is no direct indication from Plato that his own views are even to be found therein? Most philosophers of Plato attempt to decipher from Plato's texts seemingly all manner of ideas expressed by Socrates which they then attribute to Plato. They seek to ascribe to Plato particular views about justice, art, love, virtue, knowledge, and the like because, they believe, Socrates is Plato's mouthpiece through the dialogues. But is such an approach justified? What are the arguments in favor of such an approach? Is there a viable alternative approach to Plato's dialogues? In this rigorous account of the dominant approach to Plato's dialogues, there is no room left for reasonable doubt about the problematic reasons given for the notion that Plato's dialogues reveal either Plato's or Socrates' beliefs, doctrines or theories about substantive philosophical matters. Corlett's approach to Plato's dialogues is applied to a variety of passages throughout Plato's works on a wide range of topics concerning justice. In-depth discussions of themes such as legal obligation, punishment and compensatory justice are clarified and with some surprising results. Plato's works serve as a rich source of philosophical thinking about such matters. A central question in today's Platonic studies is whether Socrates, or any other protagonist in the dialogues, presents views that the author wanted to assert or defend. Professor Corlett offers a detailed defense of his view that the role of Socrates is to raise questions rather than to provide the author's answers to them. This defense is timely as intellectual historians consider the part played by Academic scholars centuries after Plato in systematizing Platonism. J. J. Mulhern, University of Pennsylvania

This work fills the gap for a much needed analytical philosophical work articulating and defending agnosticism as a critique of both theism and atheism. "The Errors of Atheism" is a response to the glaring gap that exists in the analytical philosophical literature on the problem of whether or not God exists. While on the one hand there is the large body of work by orthodox Christian theists such as Alvin Plantinga and Richard Swinburne, and relatively few atheists like Kai Nielsen who challenge certain orthodox Christian theistic arguments and analysis, there is on the other hand a lack of analytical philosophical work articulating and defending agnosticism as a critique of both theism and atheism. Corlett argues that the conceptual depths of theism must be explored beyond orthodoxy in order to re-open the debate about whether or not God exists. "The Errors of Atheism" is a piece of analytical philosophy of religion that seeks to disrupt the prevalent way of thinking about the problem of God amongst atheists and theists alike. Philosophy of religion has been dominated by well-intentioned analytical philosophers, most all of whom presuppose various traditional Christian doctrines and thus do not take non-orthodox theism seriously, and by a few atheists who also presume that orthodox Christian theism is the only theism worth addressing. Professor Corlett, however, argues that the truth lies somewhere between these two positions.

If affirmative action and other ethnicity-based social programmes are justified then, J. Angelo Corlett believes, it is important to come to an adequate understanding of the nature of ethnicity in general and ethnic group membership in particular. In this book, Corlett reconceptualizes traditional ideas of race in terms of ethnicity. As he makes clear, the answers to the questions what is a Native American? or What is a Latino/a? have important implications for public policy, especially for those programmes designed to address historic injustices and economic and social imbalances among different groups in our society. then analyses the nature and function of racism. Corlett argues for a notion of racism that must encompass not only racist beliefs but also racist actions, omissions and attempted actions. His aim is to craft a definition of racism that will prove useful in legal and public policy contexts. for ethnic groups are desirable and what forms those reparations should take: land, money, social programmes? He addresses the need for differential affirmative action programmes and reparations policies - the experiences (and oppressors) of different ethnic groups vary greatly. Arguments for reparations to Native and African Americans are considered in light of a variety of objections that are or might be raised against them. Corlett articulates and critically analyses a number of possible proposals for reparations.

If affirmative action and other ethnicity-based social programs are justified, then J. Angelo Corlett believes it is important to come to an adequate understanding of the nature of ethnicity in general and ethnic group membership in particular. In Race, Racism, and Reparations, Corlett reconceptualizes traditional ideas of race in terms of ethnicity. As he makes clear, the answers to the questions "What is a Native American"? or "What is a Latino/a"? have important implications for public policy, especially for those programs designed to address historic injustices and economic and social imbalances among different groups in our society. Having supplanted "race" with a well-defined concept of ethnicity, the author then analyzes the nature and function of racism. Corlett argues for a notion of racism that must encompass not only racist beliefs but also racist actions, omissions, and attempted actions. His aim is to craft a definition of racism that will prove useful in legal and public policy contexts.Corlett places special emphasis on the broad questions of whether reparations for ethnic groups are desirable and what forms those reparations should take: land, money, social programs? He addresses the need for differential affirmative action programs and reparations policies the experiences (and oppressors) of different ethnic groups vary greatly. Arguments for reparations to Native and African Americans are considered in light of a variety of objections that are or might be raised against them. Corlett articulates and critically analyzes a number of possible proposals for reparations."