The validity of the transformation rules ensures that the correct application of the rules will not lead to fallacies. The book concludes with a discussion of some fundamental differences between graphical systems and linguistic systems.

Logic, the discipline that explores valid reasoning, does not need to be limited to a specific form of representation but should include any form as long as it allows us to draw sound conclusions from given information. The use of diagrams has a long but unequal history in logic: The golden age of diagrammatic logic of the 19th century thanks to Euler and Venn diagrams was followed by the early 20th century's symbolization of modern logic by Frege and Russell. Recently, we have been witnessing a revival of interest in diagrams from various disciplines - mathematics, logic, philosophy, cognitive science, and computer science. This book aims to provide a space for this newly debated topic - the logical status of diagrams - in order to advance the goal of universal logic by exploring common and/or unique features of visual reasoning.

One effect of information technology is the increasing need to present information visually. The trend raises intriguing questions. What is the logical status of reasoning that employs visualization? What are the cognitive advantages and pitfalls of this reasoning? What kinds of tools can be developed to aid in the use of visual representation? This newest volume on the Studies in Logic and Computation series addresses the logical aspects of the visualization of information. The authors of these specially commissioned papers explore the properties of diagrams, charts, and maps, and their use in problem solving and teaching basic reasoning skills. As computers make visual representations more commonplace, it is important for professionals, researchers and students in computer science, philosophy, and logic to develop an understanding of these tools; this book can clarify the relationship between visuals and information.

The use of diagrams in logic and geometry has encountered resistance in recent years. For a proof to be valid in geometry, it must not rely on the graphical properties of a diagram. In logic, the teaching of proofs depends on sentenial representations, ideas formed as natural language sentences such as "If A is true and B is true...." No serious formal proof system is based on diagrams. This book explores the reasons why structured graphics have been largely ignored in contemporary formal theories of axiomatic systems. In particular, it elucidates the systematic forces in the intellectual history of mathematics which have driven the adoption of sentential representational styles over diagrammatic ones. In this book, the effects of historical forces on the evolution of diagrammatically-based systems of inference in logic and geometry are traced from antiquity to the early twentieth-century work of David Hilbert. From this exploration emerges an understanding that the present negative attitudes towards the use of diagrams in logic and geometry owe more to implicit appeals to their history and philosophical background than to any technical incompatibility with modern theories of logical systems.

A case study of multimodal systems and a new interpretation of Charles S. Peirce's theory of reasoning and signs based on an analysis of his system of Existential Graphs. At the dawn of modern logic, Charles S. Peirce invented two types of logical systems, one symbolic and the other graphical. In this book Sun-Joo Shin explores the philosophical roots of the birth of Peirce's Existential Graphs in his theory of representation and logical notation. Shin demonstrates that Peirce is the first philosopher to lay a solid philosophical foundation for multimodal representation systems. Shin analyzes Peirce's well-known, but much-criticized nonsymbolic representation system. She presents a new approach to his graphical system based on her discovery of its unique nature and on a reconstruction of Peirce's theory of representation. By seeking to understand graphical systems on their own terms, she uncovers the reasons why graphical systems, and Existential Graphs in particular, have been underappreciated among logicians. Drawing on perspectives from the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, logic, and computer science, Shin provides evidence for a genuinely interdisciplinary project on multimodal reasoning.

This book examines the logical foundations of visual information: information presented in the form of diagrams, graphs, charts, tables, and maps. The importance of visual information is clear from its frequent presence in everyday reasoning and communication, and also in computation. Chapters of the book develop the logics of familiar systems of diagrams such as Venn diagrams and Euler circles. Other chapters develop the logic of higraphs, Peirce diagrams, and a system having both diagrams and sentences among its well-formed representations. Syntax, semantics, rules of inference, and soundness and completeness results are provided for each of the systems. In addition to developing the logic of diagrams, key questions about the status of visual information are discussed, such as the relationship between language and visually-presented information.

PRAISE FOR THE BOOK:"Dejnozka's erudition continues to astound me." - Nicholas Griffin.As Canada Research Chair and Director of the Bertrand Russell Research Centre at McMaster University, Professor Griffin directs the editing of the ongoing editions of The Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, currently at 16 volumes. He also edited The Cambridge Companion to Bertrand Russell, and has written several books and articles."Dejnozka challenges the reader to open his mind for a new interpretation of Russell's work, in particular that relevance notions have a greater place in his philosophy of logic than has been stressed before. Dejnozka's work is full of material which stimulates one to rethink Russell's philosophy of logic, and it is greatly to the author's credit that he brings to light such a wealth of crucial issues in the history and philosophy of logic." - Shahid Rahman.Professor Rahman teaches at the Université de Lille (France). He has served as dean and supervised many dissertations. He is the author of several books and the editor of several anthologies in logic and the philosophy of logic. He recently edited a book on Hugh MacColl. He has also written many articles and reviews, and read papers at various congresses.PUBLISHED REVIEW:"Dejnozka's defense of his view is well articulated and strongly supported by citing thinkers of the caliber of Quine, Russell and Wittgenstein, among others. Moreover, the defense is presented in a clear and explicit way, making evident the role played by relevance logic and diagrams.... Finally, a very positive aspect is the presence of many explanatory notes, placed at the end of the book, that shed light on the discussion in the text." Edgar L. B. Almeida, Logic and Logical Philosophy (2013).PUBLISHED REVIEW:"The main argument of the book is interesting for suggesting that truth ground containment, i.e. the classical notion of consequence, embodies a meaningful notion of a connection between the assumptions and the conclusion of a valid argument.... I do think that the book's main claims hold.... Yes, classical validity can be seen as involving a...notion of containment - containment of truth grounds. Yes, this notion can be found in the writings of outstanding modern classical logicians such as Wittgenstein or Russell. Yes, the relevantist's notion of relevance...can be seen as a species of a broader genus. Perhaps the greatest merit of the present book is that it emphasizes these points explicitly." Igor Sedlár, Organon F (2014).BOOK DESCRIPTION:In the first volume of their monumental work, Entailment, Alan Ross Anderson and Nuel D. Belnap say that the "modern classical tradition[,] stemming from Frege and Whitehead-Russell, gave no consideration whatsoever to the classical notion of relevance." But just what is this classical notion? I argue that the relevance tradition is implicitly most deeply concerned with the containment of truth-grounds. Thus modern classical logicians such as Peirce, Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, and Quine are implicit relevantists on the deepest level. In showing this, I reunite two fields of logic which have become basically separated from each other: relevance logic and diagram logic. I argue that there are two main concepts of relevance, intensional and extensional. The first is that of the relevantists. The second is the concept of truth-ground containment as following from in Wittgenstein's Tractatus. I show that this second concept belongs to the diagram tradition of showing that the premisses contain the conclusion by the fact that the conclusion is diagrammed in the very act of diagramming the premisses. I argue that the extensional concept is primary, with at least five usable modern classical filters or constraints, and indefinitely many secondary intensional filters or constraints. In this way, I argue for a major reunion of purpose in logic between relevantists and modern classical logicians.