Using Inclusion Diagrams as an Alternative to Venn Diagrams to Determine the Validity of Categorical Syllogisms
From MaRDI portal
Publication:6265122
arXiv1509.00926MaRDI QIDQ6265122FDOQ6265122
Authors: Osvaldo Skliar, Ricardo E. Monge, Sherry Gapper 
Publication date: 2 September 2015
Abstract: Inclusion diagrams are introduced as an alternative to using Venn diagrams to determine the validity of categorical syllogisms, and are used here for the analysis of diverse categorical syllogisms. As a preliminary example of a possible generalization of the use of inclusion diagrams, consideration is given also to an argument that includes more than two premises and more than three terms, the classic major, middle and minor terms in categorical syllogisms.
Classical propositional logic (03B05) Mathematics and visual arts (00A66) Classical first-order logic (03B10) Logic (educational aspects) (97E30)
This page was built for publication: Using Inclusion Diagrams as an Alternative to Venn Diagrams to Determine the Validity of Categorical Syllogisms
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q6265122)
