It is a odd thing about Leonard Nelson's diagrams. See https://my.fit.edu/~aberdein/Nelson.pdf on some of the recent history by a philosopher in Florida Dr Andrew Aberdein. Dr Kelley Ross [California] has his own expansion of the idea instead of a square he expands the method into a cube.
So on one hand you can argue that it simply is away to make his arguments clear. But you have to wonder. For example you have Feynman diagrams that are common in QFT. They are a device. But he thought that they also present how things actually are.
So perhaps there is a connection between logic principles and Geometry. And perhaps you could expand into higher dimensional Geometry or even Algebraic geometry. [That is kind of like Abstract Algebra, but a little different-- in that it deals with local things instead of global things, like Algebraic Topology.]
But you have to wonder if this is perhaps not such a great idea because after all Mathematics was thought to be reducible to Logic until Godel came along.
So on one hand you can argue that it simply is away to make his arguments clear. But you have to wonder. For example you have Feynman diagrams that are common in QFT. They are a device. But he thought that they also present how things actually are.
So perhaps there is a connection between logic principles and Geometry. And perhaps you could expand into higher dimensional Geometry or even Algebraic geometry. [That is kind of like Abstract Algebra, but a little different-- in that it deals with local things instead of global things, like Algebraic Topology.]
But you have to wonder if this is perhaps not such a great idea because after all Mathematics was thought to be reducible to Logic until Godel came along.
