Talk:Monotonicity of entailment

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Monotonicity of entailment article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Philosophy: Logic Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic

Impenetrable[edit]

This article is completely impenetrable to anyone who doesn't already understand the concept. I would suggest trying to use more examples. It would also be worthwhile trying to explain in simple terms how this concept is used - is it a philosophical concept? A mathematical one? Is it used in particular fields like computer science for specific purposes? I've read the article and I'm completely clueless. 2.121.223.8 (talk) 08:37, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thin[edit]

This was very thin. I wasn't really able to work out what monotonicity was from this discussion. A more extensive discussion would help, especially as the article on non-monotonic logic basically relies on this one to get across the whole concept. Examples wouldn't hurt, either. --LarsMarius (talk) 13:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of July 2023[edit]

I've rewritten the text to make it easier to understand. I've added two references and I hope that justifies the removal of the "needs more references" tag. Dezaxa (talk) 02:05, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]