August 12, 2016

I was originally scheduled to give a talk entitled “What Proofs are About” at the About Aboutness Workshop at the University of Melbourne on Saturday, July 16, 2016, but my plane back to Melbourne was delayed and I didn’t get to present the paper then.

So, I’m presenting it at the Melbourne Logic Seminar instead.

Abstract: This talk is a comparison of how three different approaches to subject matter treat some pairs of statements that say different things but are (classically) logically equivalent. The pairs are

  1. \(p\lor\neg p\) and \(\top\)
  2. \(p\lor(p\land q)\) and \(p\)
  3. \((p\lor\neg p)\lor(q\lor\neg q)\) and \((p\lor\neg p)\land(q\lor\neg q)\).

I compare and contrast the notion of subject matter introduced in Stephen Yablo’s Aboutness (Princeton University Press, 2014), truthmakers conceived of as situations, as discussed in my “Truthmakers, Entailment and Necessity,” and the proof invariants I have explored in recent work.


I’m Greg Restall, and this is my personal website. I teach philosophy and logic as Professor of Philosophy at the University of Melbourne. ¶ Start at the home page of this site—a compendium of recent additions around here—and go from there to learn more about who I am and what I do. ¶ This is my personal site on the web. Nothing here is in any way endorsed by the University of Melbourne.



To receive updates from this site, you can subscribe to the  RSS feed of all updates to the site in an RSS feed reader, or follow me on Twitter at  @consequently, where I’ll update you if anything is posted.