ROLE
I'm a core member of the Research On Logical Expressivism (ROLE) group, led by Robert Brandom and Ulf Hlobil. We work on developing a conception of logic according to which logic is, as Brandom puts it in Making It Explicit, "the organ of semantic self-consciousness." For some idea of what that might mean (if this diagram here isn't self-explanatory), check out our website.
As far as my own contributions to the group are concerned, there are really two main things that I've focused on in the years I've been working with them. The first has been to bring the formalism of bilateral logic, proposed by Timothy Smiley and Ian Rumfitt, to bear on the sort of logical expressivism proposed by Brandom that is of principle concern to the group. The main presentation of this aspect of my work is in this paper. For a more accessible introduction to this work, see this paper I wrote for Michael Kremer's retirement conference, and, for a different perspective on it, see this paper by Brandom. The second thing I've been working on has been to contextualize Brandom-style inferentialism and logical expressivism in the context of dynamic semantic framework, of the sort proposed by Frank Veltman. The main presentation of this aspect of my work is in this paper.
If you're interested in the sort of stuff we work on, feel free to get in touch! Also, Ulf Hlobil and I are editing a special issue of Topoi on logical expressivism for which there is currently an open call for papers. Please do submit something!
As far as my own contributions to the group are concerned, there are really two main things that I've focused on in the years I've been working with them. The first has been to bring the formalism of bilateral logic, proposed by Timothy Smiley and Ian Rumfitt, to bear on the sort of logical expressivism proposed by Brandom that is of principle concern to the group. The main presentation of this aspect of my work is in this paper. For a more accessible introduction to this work, see this paper I wrote for Michael Kremer's retirement conference, and, for a different perspective on it, see this paper by Brandom. The second thing I've been working on has been to contextualize Brandom-style inferentialism and logical expressivism in the context of dynamic semantic framework, of the sort proposed by Frank Veltman. The main presentation of this aspect of my work is in this paper.
If you're interested in the sort of stuff we work on, feel free to get in touch! Also, Ulf Hlobil and I are editing a special issue of Topoi on logical expressivism for which there is currently an open call for papers. Please do submit something!
ISC
I'm a member of the International Sellars Colloquium (ISC), organized by Luz C. Seiberth. We meet monthly to discuss work by and about Wilfrid Sellars (pictured here, looking dapper).
For more info, check out our website, which contains a bunch of useful links if you're interested in Sellars.
If you're interested in my own take on Sellars's philosophy, check out my paper on Sellars's nominalism, my paper on Sellars's Kantianism, my paper on Sellars's transcendental linguistics, or this interview I did with Figure/Ground where I discuss Sellars's nominalism and various other aspects of his philosophy.
For more info, check out our website, which contains a bunch of useful links if you're interested in Sellars.
If you're interested in my own take on Sellars's philosophy, check out my paper on Sellars's nominalism, my paper on Sellars's Kantianism, my paper on Sellars's transcendental linguistics, or this interview I did with Figure/Ground where I discuss Sellars's nominalism and various other aspects of his philosophy.
The PTS-Network
I'm a member of the Proof-Theoretic Semantics (PTS) Network, a group dedicated to the development of proof-theoretic semantics. For more info, see the website here.
Much of my work in proof-theoretic semantics has been dealing with bilateralism in proof-theoretic semantics. See especially this paper and this paper.
Much of my work in proof-theoretic semantics has been dealing with bilateralism in proof-theoretic semantics. See especially this paper and this paper.