Eh, good point. I’m still learning them myself, but they are sort of gamey in that they are a visual/diagrammic way of representing predicate and/or modal logic, but I’m not sure what winning or losing would correspond to. Peirce even suggests it as a sort of game between the proposer and the doubter of the proposition, as the two sides take turns trying to prove either the argument is valid or invalid.
Sounds interesting. Could indeed be game-potential in there. You’ll probably be in a better position to come up with them if there are… if you spot any good ones, let us know :)
Yeah, this is the paper I’ve been studying for some time now, and I’ve been starting to draw my own existential graphs. I’m just not good enough at it yet to say either way on this topic though.
Eh, good point. I’m still learning them myself, but they are sort of gamey in that they are a visual/diagrammic way of representing predicate and/or modal logic, but I’m not sure what winning or losing would correspond to. Peirce even suggests it as a sort of game between the proposer and the doubter of the proposition, as the two sides take turns trying to prove either the argument is valid or invalid.
Sounds interesting. Could indeed be game-potential in there. You’ll probably be in a better position to come up with them if there are… if you spot any good ones, let us know :)
Yeah, this is the paper I’ve been studying for some time now, and I’ve been starting to draw my own existential graphs. I’m just not good enough at it yet to say either way on this topic though.