Talk:Monotonicity of entailment

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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

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]

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]

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]