Sellars possessed a broad vision, but did not shy away from detail work.  He was a “philosopher’s philosopher;” his essays are complex and difficult pieces, challenging but rewarding to master.  Beginning in 1994 with Sellars-inspired publications by his erstwhile colleagues John McDowell and Robert B. Brandom, interest in Sellars’ work has increased steadily, both in the U. S. and abroad.  Publications and conferences focused on or inspired by Sellars are now common.  In 2015, for instance, significant conferences devoted to Sellars were held in North America, Europe, and the Middle East.  The literature on Sellars has grown appreciably since the last revision of this article.  Sellars’s philosophy is rich enough to provide a framework within which otherwise distinct philosophical tendencies can find sufficient common ground to engage each other fruitfully.  Sellars studies has been dominated by a clash between the “right-wing Sellarsians” (e.g., Patricia and Paul Churchland, Ruth Millikan, Jay Rosenberg), who emphasize Sellars’s scientific realism and nominalism, and the “left-wing Sellarsians” (e.g., Rorty, McDowell, and Brandom), who emphasize instead Sellars’s insistence on the irreducibility and sociality of rules and norms. Sellars’s expressivism has garnered increasing attention in both camps. Lately, a younger generation has begun constructing a finer-grained story of Sellars’s development.  This will likely enable a better articulation of the structure of Sellars’s philosophy and, perhaps, a new sense of its potential.