Title: Philosophical Discussions with Pragma-dialectics Special Issue: Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy Guest Editors: Constanza Ihnen, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile Jan Albert van Laar, University of Groningen, The Netherlands Marcin Lewiński, NOVA University, Lisbon, Portugal Deadline for submission: 31 January 2024 We are inviting submissions of papers for a Special Issue of the journal Topoi, entitled Philosophical Discussions with Pragma-dialectics. On the occasion of the 40 th anniversary of the publication of van Eemeren and Grootendorst’s Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions (Foris, 1984) and the 20 th anniversary of A Systematic Theory of Argumentation (CUP, 2004), the issue aims to foster a lively debate on the core philosophical commitments and consequences of the pragma-dialectical theory in its standard and extended version. Papers, which should not exceed a maximum of 9.000 words, should be written in English, fit for double blind review, and must be submitted through the online submission system Editorial Manager, by choosing the category "S.I.: Philosophical Discussions with Pragma- Dialectics (Ihnen/van Laar/Lew)" from the drop-down list. Please read the Submission Guidelines before submitting your paper. Pragma-dialectics is today one of the most influential theories of argumentation. At the heart of the theory is the model for a “critical discussion”, a two-party discursive procedure for resolving differences of opinion in a reasonable way, designed to provide a heuristic, analytical, and critical framework for the study of argumentative discourse. Underlying the model there is a set of interrelated philosophical commitments concerning the idea of argumentative reasonableness and the pragmatic rules and principles that can best describe and explain argumentative practices. The pragma-dialectical core commitments are explicitly presented and extensively justified in Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions [SAAD] and A Systematic Theory of Argumentation [STA]. In SAAD, the emphasis is placed on the development of a linguistic approach that characterises argumentative discussions as an orderly exchange of speech acts instrumental in the rational resolution of a difference of opinion. This pragmatic conception of argument is based on a critical assessment and partial modification of the “standard version” of speech act theory, as developed by John L. Austin and John Searle,