Methods of Logic [Paperback]

W. V. Quine (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: November 16, 1982 | ISBN-10: 0674571762 | ISBN-13: 978-0674571761 | Edition: 4th

This widely used textbook of modern formal logic now offers a number of new features. Incorporating updated notations, selective answers to exercises, expanded treatment of natural deduction, and new discussions of predicate- functor logic and the affinities between higher set theory and the elementary logic of terms, Quine's new edition will serve admirably both for classroom and for independent use.

Editorial Reviews

Review

Quine's book is of first-rate quality, and presents the materials of modern formal logic in a masterly fashion...A superb text: authoritative, mature, and brilliant and original in its exposition.
--Ernest Nagel

It is admirably precise and it is written with a deliciously light touch.
--Joseph S. Ullian

For a treatment of such modest size, it abounds in exciting ideas, freshness of perspective on old logical and philosophical problems, and in lucid and exact analysis.
--R. J. Trayhern

About the Author

W. V. Quine was Edgar Pierce Professor of Philosophy, Harvard University. He wrote twenty-one books, thirteen of them published by Harvard University Press.

Product Details

• Paperback: 344 pages
• Publisher: Harvard University Press; 4th edition (November 16, 1982)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0674571762
• ISBN-13: 978-0674571761
• Product Dimensions: 8.9 x 6 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.4 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (8 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #590,314 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

18 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Quine is a master of logic, April 5, 2000

By 

David J. Paul (Michigan, USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Methods of Logic (Paperback)

I've taught college level logic courses, and I return, from time to time, to classics. No one who is serious about contemporary logic can afford to not read Quine. His explanations are clear, although the symbols used are a bit unorthodox. I recommend this to anyone who is already familiar with elementary symbolic logic. Additionally, an awareness of modal or quantificational logic would be helpful.

19 of 20 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A good start, March 7, 2001

By 

Kenghis Khan (nprvl,il,usa) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Methods of Logic (Paperback)

Like any great book, this one could be a bit, though not too much, better. By far and away the most useful element of Quine's book is his treatment of translating ordinary English into logical schemata. I have never seen such a lucid and effective presentation of the task, and I recommend the book very highly to anybody on that account. His presentation of truth-functional and quantificational schemata are solid are simply excellent. The book, however, is not without its defects of which I should caution prospective buyers about. First, there are many treatments in the book of historical interest, but to a student of first-order logic they may seem to be a bit excessive. His incorporation of Polish notation, while fascinating in its own right, is not in accorance with Quine's drive for efficiency and conciseness. A similar account goes for his treatment of Boolean algebra. It is in that treatment that Quine introduces many ideas indispensible to quantificational logic, yet it is tempting to skip over those chapters when one can sufficiently delve into quantification theory. Secondly, his notation is, as another reviewer points out, unorthodox. It is very effective and in my opinion superior to the conventional formality, but this could be difficult to deal with, and one wonders if Quine should have been more cautious about varying his symbols from the norm. Finally, Quine's treatment of the Completeness Proof and the Lowenheim Theorem, while quite solid in their own right, could be more effective. Quine seems to be keen on applying a constructivist approach to the proof, and spends many pages on definitions and lemmas that can be avoided. One can provide a proof by contradiction in order to sufficiently demonstrate most of his treatment of the matter, as so much of it is spent proving the "law of infinite conjunction," which is really only an 8 step proof. I won't go into the details here, but keep that in mind when studying the chapter. Nevertheless, Quine's work is as entertaining as it is rigorous.

18 of 19 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars a great introduction to first-order logic ..., October 18, 2000

By 

forehandshanker (New York, NY USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Methods of Logic (Paperback)

Quine is well-known in this century for being one of the premier analytic philosophers in the Anglo-American tradition. He probably used this book for his upper-division course in logic for philosophy majors. After reading this book, I can see his reputation is well-justified.

This book is more than just a textbook in logic. In his own way, Quine shows in his examples just how difficult it is to break down ordinary language into symbolic logic, and in the process (hopefully), one should learn both rigorous thinking and charity. These are rare commodities today.

Quine has the rather idiosyncratic position that modal logic only confuses matters. However, I would rather read a complete introduction to modal logic, than to receive only a chapter's worth of treatment. Hence, I can deal with his excluding modal logic from this book.

I do wish there was a short chapter or glossary on informal logic, since many other treatments do continue to use those terms (e.g. Copi). Knowing the terminology does help one to communicate in prose one's analysis of an argument. It does help to know all those latin distinctions (e.g. ad hominem, ad nominem, ad populii, petitio principii, etc.).

That being said, I'm a much clearer thinker for having worked through this book, and I would heartily recommend this for anybody.