A scientific meeting is a success when it promotes a blend of ideas, proposals, guidelines and criticisms that will influence further research in the area. Measured by such standards, the Workshop on Paraconsistent Logic (WoPaLo), 1 was a very successful meeting. The present volume intends to attest this, bringing a finely revised collection of articles, a sequel of a previous electronic publication containing all the extended abstracts available under the title "Proceedings of the Workshop on Paraconsistent Logic (WoPaLo)" at CLE e-Prints Vol. 2(7), 2002. 2 Paraconsistency, in very simple terms, is the logical study of inconsistent yet non-trivial theories or premise sets. It is a sign of maturity of contemporary logic that logicians were liberated from the horror contradictionis and started to build theories in which contradictories may not only subsist but in fact be the object of mathematical study. In brief terms, paraconsistency is neither the sport of collecting contradictions or passion of cultivating them, nor the craft of building eccentric logics, but rather the delicate art of carving logical systems with less material than in the abundance and security of classical territory, where contradictions are banned and one has at her disposal a surplus of building material.
Without any intention of historical completeness, but just to mark an area of research, it may be appropriate to recall here the names of the Polish logician Stanisław Jaśkowski and the Brazilian logician Newton C.A. da Costa, who independently urged for the development of logical systems in which the classical principle that demands anything to follow from a contradiction would be logically controlled. Much of the impetus of the research on paraconsistent logics is motivated by the attainment of those goals: Taming the explosive power of contradictions, and yet being able to deliver logics sharing with the classical paradigm many desirable features, as model existence results and model theory, reasonable proof methods, algebraic and set-theoretic counterparts, (un)decidability and so on. More-