consequently.org/news

About

I'm Greg Restall, and this is my website. I work in Philosophy at the University of Melbourne. [Email: greg at consequently.org; Skype: greg_restall; Post: Department of Philosophy, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia.]

Writing

These are the three last modified entries on my writing page.

“Truthmakers, Entailment and Necessity 2008,” an addendum to “Truthmakers, Entailment and Necessity,” to appear in Truth and Truth-making, edited by E. J. Lowe and A. Rami, Acumen, 2008. →
[with Rebecca Kukla and Mark Lance] Appendix to Rebecca Kukla and Mark Lance ‘Yo!’ and ‘Lo!’: the pragmatic topography of the space of reasons, Harvard University Press, to appear. →
“Curry’s Revenge: the costs of non-classical solutions to the paradoxes of self-reference,” in The Revenge of the Liar, ed. JC Beall, Oxford University Press, pages 262–271, 2008. →
“Anti-Realist Classical Logic and Realist Mathematics,” under revision. →
“Proof Theory and Meaning: on second order logic,” to appear in the Logica 2007 Yearbook, Filosofia. →

Classes

In Semester 2, which starts on July 31, I’ll be teaching an honours seminar 161-438 Logic and Philosophy, in which we cover proof theory and its applications to semantics.

Events

AAL2007: the annual conference of the Australasian Association for Logic, University of Melbourne November 9 to 11, 2007.

Recent Past

University of Melbourne Philosophy Undergraduate Workshop, University of Melbourne September 21 to 23, 2007.

Logic Colloquium 2007, Wrocław, Poland, July 14-19, 2007.

1st GPMR Workshop on Logic & Semantics on Medieval Logic and Modern Applied Logic, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, Germany, on June 28-30, 2007.

Logica 2007, Hejnice Monastery, Czech Republic, 18-22 June 2007.

Heart of Philosophy Café talk and discussion on “What Marx, Freud and Nietzsche have taught me about belief in God”. Tuesday May 8, 7--9pm in the Merrick's General Store.

… and we’re back

I’ve been back in Melbourne for a while. The trip was very enjoyable, but I’ve returned to Melbourne with a chest bug, which has meant that I’m not quite up to full speed yet. All non-essential activities (and alas, some essential ones, I fear) are progressing much more slowly than usual.

Here are some highlights of the trip.

Logica 2007 with so many great people, and then exploring Prague, catching up with Richard, and getting to know more Czech logicians.
Overdosing on Medieval logic in Bonn, and especially talking over Bradwardine with Stephen Read.
Exploring København with Christine and Zachary. It was my second visit there, and Christine’s umpteenth, so it was a lot easier to get around given than we were more familiar with the place.
Navigating our way on the trains and buses from Århus to Legoland in Billund with Zachary, and then enjoying all there was to see and do there.
Meeting everyone at Logic Colloquium in Wrocław — and especially thinking through — with Pavel Pudlák, Albert Visser, Alasdair Urquhart and Vedran Čačić — a counterexample to a conjecture of Grzegorczyk’s. The result of our thinking is here. Most of the thinking got done in a hike in the hills near Wrocław.
Flying back home with Z. Normally he finds the in-flight entertainment much more attractive than mundane activities such as sleep. This can sometimes cause difficulty, especially when flying in to an airport for a quick change of planes, and we have a tired unhappy boy to navigate through the system. This time, however, he slept well on both flights (Frankfurt to Singapore and Singapore to Melbourne), and we managed to get back home with very little jetlag.

So, a good time was had by all. It’s good to be back, even if we have to struggle through a bit more of winter here. At least our AFL team is performing better than expected, so we might be able to cope with the end of the season here in football-mad Melbourne.

Posted 04:36 PM on August 5, 2007

Comments

It’s great to have you back, Greg. I’m envious of your travels (not only with C and Z, but also the wildly envy-inviting logic fest at Logica, Bonn, and Wroclaw (excuse the type deficiency). The counterexample to Grzegorczyk’s conjecture is neat. (Perhaps I should be embarrassed to say that I didn’t know the conjecture, but it’s a compliment to your & Co.’s exposition that I now know it’s false!)

Stay well. -JC

JC Beall , August 7, 2007 08:32 AM