I’ve rewritten my paper on supervaluational consequence . Material from the blog post below is now included in a separate section. The basic moral is this: (a) supervaluationalists (at least those guys who identify truth with supertruth) do need to go with global consequence rather than local consequence, as Williamson always insisted. But (b) contra orthodoxy, global consequence doesn’t give you counterexamples to familiar logical rules like contraposition and reductio. (There is a proviso, which is obliquely discussed here).
I’ve also revamped my work in progress page, which contains versions of forthcoming papers and a fair amount of genuine work-in-progress. I’m in the camp of people who put up drafts online pretty quickly. I’ve got a tendancy to work up something in draft and then let it languish on my hard disk for months or years… putting papers online is a pretty good reminder system, and also strong motivation not to let stuff sit around with errors in it.