I am originally from Toronto, Canada. I have retained my Canadian accent (or so my Kiwi friends tell me when they can’t understand what I’m saying) and the (probably futile) hope that the Maple Leafs will again win the Stanley Cup some day. After leaving Toronto, I moved around a bit, living in the States, Australia, and on both ends of Canada before settling in New Zealand. Now I live in lovely Wellington and teach at Victoria University.
Victoria is a wonderful place to do logic. We have a Centre for Logic, Language and Computation, which has members from our maths, philosophy, computer science, and linguistics programmes. There is a lot of interesting work going on here on modal logic, non-classical logics, model theory, algebraic logic, recursion theory, complexity theory, and set theory.
My current research is on relevant logic, Bertrand Russell, and on the logic of belief revision. My interest in Russell is to reconstruct his view ca. 1913 to make a coherent epistemology and philosophy of mathematics. I started down this road by reading Bernie Linsky’s book, Russell’s Metaphysical Logic. This project is just beginning but it promises to be long and difficult but fun.
My work on belief revision started with the question of how we should amend traditional epistemologies given the view that it is sometimes legitimate to believe in a contradiction. I realised early on that even if we think that to believe the negation of a proposition does not preclude believing the proposition itself, we may still hold that there are some propositions that we find abhorrent, that we want to preclude believing. These abhorrent propositions are those that we reject. The theory of belief revision has us revise our beliefs and rejections in response to new information to retain a coherent (although perhaps inconsistent) whole, in which the set of beliefs do not entail (disjunctions of) any of the propositions that are rejected. This project has also led me to think and write about paraconsistency, negation, and rejection.
My work on relevant logic has been both formal and philosophical. The philosophical ideas, as they currently stand, are in my book. For some years I have been thinking about provability predicates in a form of Peano arithmetic based on relevant logic.
I have also done some joint work about the use of critical thinking in management and the public service. Bob Cavana of Victoria’s Management School and I have been working on a project linking critical thinking with systems thinking in the analysis of processes in the private and public sector. We have a paper on this forthcoming in the journal, Systems Dynamics Review.
I have a Rough Collie named “Zermela”. “Zermela” is the feminine form of “Zermelo”. She is named after the mathematician, Ernst Zermelo. Zermelo was one of the founders of modern set theory, having provided it with an early axiomatisation. Zermelo was also responsible for the first explicit formulation of the axiom of choice and for the discovery of large cardinals. Zermelo even discovered Russell’s paradox four years before Russell (at least according to Hilbert).
If you look at the pictures below and take into account Zermelo’s mathematical achievements, you will understand why I named my Collie puppy after him.
.
This is Zermela the Collie as a puppy.

And this is Ernst Zermelo the set theorist.
Relevant Logic: A Philosophical Interpretation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004
(co-authored with Stuart Brock), Realism versus Anti-Realism, under contract to Acumen Press