Customer Reviews

Elementary Logic: Revised Edition

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I am surprised to be the first one to write a review about this book. However, I can see how this happened - the author himself writes in his preface to this last edition: "Publisher's samples of fifty-five logic textbooks have accumulated in my office, all introductory and in English. Quantification theory or the first-order predicate calculus is covered in one way or another in most of them. Forty years ago it was covered in none." Forty years ago W. O. Quine published his "Elementary Logic" and set some standards in Logic. I would only want to stress the fact that the good thing about this book is not only that it was the first of this kind, chronologically speaking, but that it still is the first, from a logical point of view (this is the title of another one of Quine's books). Usual readers may not realize that the standards that Quine set forty years ago are still the best that one can find in his attempt to learn Logic. I haven't read a better introductory textbook of Logic and I recommend it to anyone who really wants to understand how the Science of all Sciences (as the medieval philosophers called Logic) works.

I am disappointed with this book. I have taken symbolic logic, mathematical, et cetera, at university and I found this book to be unnecessarily confusing. I think what Quine was trying to do was teach symbolic logic in a way that would feel less imposing to the reader by using more words than symbols. I don't think he goes into enough depth either. I recommend this book to people who would like this approach, but I think this book is the equivalent of 30 pages of most texts on logic. There is nothing said about A,E,I and O proposition or things like existential import. Don't get me wrong, I think this book is too short to accomplish this; I am not saying that Quine was sloppy. I am simply saying that this book does not teach the bare minimum in the way of preparing someone for what they need to know after a course in "Introductory Logic." Therefore, this book suits the needs of very few people.

Nobody would deny Quine's greatness and status as a revolutionary and seminal philosopher. However, he never was exactly the sort of philosopher that appealed to the average person. I would never recommend Quine's Elementary Logic book for a beginner. This work (at least my edition) uses sort of outdated symbols. Most importantly, Quine tends to make things much harder than they really are. His explanation in terms of schemata are not very useful, and would be confusing for someone who's not already familiar with logic. The one good thing about this book is that it explains quantification pretty decently, albeit in an out-dated fashion. As another reviewer said though, what Quine describes here could be condensed into the first couple of chapters of a formal logic book.

This *would* be useful for somebody who wanted to do a refresher on the basics of logic, but only after they're at least familiar with formal logic already.

As a professional LSAT tutor/blogger in NYC, I believe this book is helpful, but not necessary, for LSAT prep.

At 144 pages, it's short and sweet. It's also the first-ever logic textbook (originally published 1941, revised 1980). It discusses many basic issues (necessary/sufficient, etc.) relevant to LSAT logic. If you have the time/inclination, feel free to give it a read, but it's by no means necessary.

I didn't check the book, cause I picked the wrong one, and I emailed seller with a request that "please don't send the book to me, I picked the wrong one" But the seller still sent the book and when receive the package I dropped it in the mail box noticed that greturn to seller"
But I have to say the seller's attitude was good.
I am not sure that whether I already took my money back now
That's it