No one seemed to notice the terrible counting in the previous post. Ah well,

* Robert Stalnaker is currently doing the Locke lectures at Oxford, and Oxford has, very impressively, made the lectures available “as a podcast”:http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/misc/johnlocke/index.shtml.
* “John Hawthorne”:http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/members/jhawthorne/index.htm has a number of forthcoming papers available on his website. I just read a nice paper on “comparative adjectives”:http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/members/jhawthorne/docs/Comparative%20Adjectives..pdf that I found while looking for something rather different. There is also a paper he wrote with Andrew McGonigal on the “Many minds theory of vagueness”:http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/members/jhawthorne/docs/Many%20Minds.pdf.
* Speaking on Andrew, he just pointed out to me how developed the Uncyclopedia pages on “philosophy”:http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Philosophy and “Logic”:http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Logic have become. A lot of the humour there is pretty sophomoric, but I do like lines like “The purpose of chicken studying philosophy is to disprove your religion, your scientific methodology, the laws of your entire civilization, your ethics, and the existence of that chair you’re sitting on (although not convincingly enough as to make you feel you have to stand up).” I don’t know what the ‘chicken’ reference is though; one of the problems with the uncyclopedia is that it is hard to tell vandalism from failed attempts at humour.
* Dan L{o’}pez de Sa, who has written several “papers”:http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~dlds/ I’ve been reading while trying to say something new about semantic relativism, has a nice looking “blog”:http://blebblog.blogspot.com/.