Customer Reviews

Introduction to Logic

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I agree with the other reviewers of this text that it is the best I've encountered (I have taught several different sections of logic over nearly ten years, using 6 or 7 different texts, and have reviewed countless others). The writing is admirably clear and precise, and reads well. Nothing extraneous here, but there is enough to elucidate ideas and strategies. There are two key features that distinguish this text from others, and render it extremely valuable.

(1) the examples and logic problems are INTERESTING, mostly because they are invariably drawn from philosophical arguments; this gives me an opportunity to tie the teaching of logic to discussion of philosophy and makes the relevance of logic to philosophy very clear; I often find students who are interested in philosophy because they have read existentialism or even Plato, and who appreciate the play of ideas they find in these texts; what they do not understand is that the poetry of ideas must be tied to logic, and, more importantly, that there is a kind of poetic rigor to logic; this text helps to make that clear.

(2) Gensler has developed a remarkably simple set of strategies for proof construction, that eliminates much of the confusion and ambiguity that students experience when encountering proofs for the first time; his "star test" for testing syllogisms is excellent, and a cinch to apply; it is even easier to grasp than Venn diagrams and is more versatile; his strategy for proofs in propositional and predicate logic is the best and easiest I've seen anywhere, and combines the merits of truth trees with standard deductive proofs, and has the advantage of yielding both proofs of validity and refutations by the very same method. The ease of the strategy means that it is possible to move much further in a single semester than usual. The content of the book goes further, too, than many of the standard textbooks. He goes into modal logic, belief logic, deontic logic and even has a chapter presenting a formalized ethical theory. Very cool stuff!!

(3) The only weakness I have found is in his explanation of translations; where he is very helpful and precise with strategies for producing proofs and refutations, his guidelines for producing translations into formal symbolism are a bit more vague and amount to only a few guidelines and a bit of hand waving. Still, even here I haven't seen much better elsewhere, so this is a minor quibble. In the context of my classroom, it just meant that this was something we spent more time on.

I really can't recommend this book highly enough for those who are interested in logic.

I have taught logic for 31 years in colleges and universities. This book, along with its logicola software prgram downloaded for free from the net, has allowed my students to learn more logic in a semester than any of the other standard books that I have ever used. I used an earlier edition of this book in 1989 and was sorry to see it go out of print. When it came back, I quickly ordered it. My students love it and the logicola program. If you want to know logic and cannot take a course, but have the will, get this book, download the logicola program, and get to work. You will not be sorry!!! Just a tremendous value and an excellent text book that covers enough material for two or even three courses in logic!!! Best wishes!

This is the best introductory book on symbolic logic I have seen. It covers not only propositional and predicate logic, but also modal, deontic, and inductive (probabilistic) logic, and it does so with remarkable clarity and economy. Professor Gensler's proof method differs slightly from those in most textbooks, but I find it more intuitive and therefore more useful. His examples are drawn from everyday life and from arguments of the great philosophers. His exercises are well designed, too. And at one-third the cost of most other (and much inferior) textbooks, this book is a great bargain.

I am not sure what the previous reviewer was referring to in his complaint about the lack of an index. This edition contains an index to proper names, while the excellent glossary of logic terms also functions as an index by listing the section numbers where each term is defined and discussed.

Gensler's approach is simple, witty, clear, and user-friedly. He doesn't pack in so much information in each chapter that the students get bogged down with surfeit info. The exerceises are good ones (and I've seen many books that have bad ones); Gensler provides a teacher's manual FREE online, as well as helpful hints on how to organize the course over a semester or year; the Logicola program is free!! and it's the best out there: it gives immediate feedback to the students; it is super easy to grade and track the students' progress. The book is also inexpensive relative to others (hurley's is about $90). Use this book, you will NOT be sorry!!!

I really enjoyed this logic textbook. It's biggest benifit is its coverage of belief logic, deontic logic, modal logic, and so on... It is amazing how much is in this book. The Logicola software that comes with this book is pretty good as well, however it is very primative looking.

Now here is the catch: I liked the book because it used interesting philosophical examples for its logic problems, however my introductory level students often found themselves lost in the philosophy-speak and unable to do the logic. The book might be best for an introductory text for philosophy majors.

I agree with the two previous reviewers that this is an outstanding introduction to logic. I would have given it 5 stars, but the publisher committed the nearly unpardonable sin of omitting an index. In these days of computerized indices, there is no excuse for not including an index. [I stand corrected by reviewer James Colby, so ignore my previous 2 sentences; and I've revised my rating to 5 stars from 4. Dec 2010]

However, more than overriding this fault is the inclusion of over 30 pages of answers to selected problems. In each section, answers are given to at least every 5th problem. This is enough to check your understanding of the section. This feature, along with the clarity of the presentation, makes this book excellent for self-study.

After working the problems in many of the chapters of this book, I've been able to use what I learned to analyze some of the arguments in articles in philosophy journals. This has helped me understand those arguments much better.

I had the pleasure of taking Professor Gensler's intro logic course when he was a faculty member at the University of Scranton. Although I still have his old course notes, I picked up a (much nicer) printed copy of his revised book.

Although his logic course is geared more towards philosophy students, I have found it very helpful in brushing up on symbolic logic, as I attempt to study advanced mathematical topics, such as nonstandard analysis, and probability theory. If you work through his course, you shouldn't have much trouble following the proofs in mathematical logic, computer science, or any related discipline.

As an added bonus, your ability to parse natural language into symbolic format should be an unfair advantage in preparation for standardized tests, such as the LSAT or GRE, which have some sections on logical reasoning ability in the verbal sections.

Science and mathematics education would improve quickly if more professors took his computer/book based approach to instruction. I strongly recommend it.

I've never had an easier, yet more rigorous, introduction to logic. From the start, the author engages you in interesting explanations which are very clear. The Logicola software is great as well, which without, I would not have understood the material as good as I do now. It's only been 4 days and I'm already on chapter 4, having done EVERY problem in the book so far and many on the software! For self study, there is no better.

I am greatly pleased with Harry Gensler's "Introduction to Logic", first edition. I am currently a philosophy-majoring sophomore at a small liberal arts college which does not have a course devoted to logic. Having read widely in analytical philosophy and having looked up many logical devices at one time or another, I did not approach the book as an absolute beginner, so my appraisal of the book may be colored by this fact. I ordered the book this past summer, but finally got down to working through it over winter break. I've done a few problem sets a day and now I've advanced through the book to Chapter 8, "Further Modal Systems". Gensler's explanations are helpful, and the Logcola program (although a bit 'hokey') has been a great help, as well; having studied the material independently, I did not have the benefit of an instructor or even a peer to work through it with me. I don't believe, however, that I am at a disadvantage for this; I feel that I understand almost all of the material covered so-far completely, and the rest almost completely.

Gensler's examples are drawn from actual philosophical disputes, so they are almost always interesting. Especially helpful was his focus on translations from normal arguments to symbolic form. I now find myself listening to arguments, translating them, and mentally checking their validity in my head. [This is, perhaps, the one negative aspect of the book... for mostly social reasons.]

I would recommend this book to anyone who wishes to independently study beginning logic, and I have a feeling that it would be of some use as a supplementary text to students in logic courses, or as a 'refresher' for those taking a course after some time away from the subject. You can't go wrong here.

-ETW

and I love it. The students enjoy it also. Given the extremely low level of mathematical technique taught in US high schools these days, trying to teach them calculus is (in my opinion) a waste of time. After a course based on Gensler's book, the students will have some idea of what thinking is and how to use logical reasoning in everyday life. I have taught both "math for poets" and "math for CS majors" out of this. Interestingly, poets are not worse at grasping the material.