Robert L. Scott's article "On Viewing Rhetoric as Epistemic" exemplifies agonistic-transcendent rhetoric in that it sought to revalue "rhetoric." However, as Scott has already noted, his project was ultimately compromised by his not revaluing "epistemic" in conjunction. Scott's article is criticized with respect to the goals of agonistic-transcendent rhetoric, namely to revalue fundamental relationships. His discussions of epistemology, knowing as doing, truth, certainty, the human condition, and the ethics of rhetoric-as-epistemic are examined. The paper concludes that Scott left too much latitude to the reader by not revaluing key concepts, and thus much of his article could be ignored. Scott's role as agonistic-transcendent rhetor and the future of his project with respect to research are explored. Rhetoric-as-epistemic is then revalued with respect to tacit knowing, conviction, and commitment. (Eighty-eight notes are included. Contains 95 references.) (Author/RS)