Customer Reviews

Notes on Logic and Set Theory (Cambridge Mathematical Textbooks)

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The book deals with the elementary parts of logic, computability and set theory from an algebraic and/or "abstract" point of view. Hence it is not really suitable as a first introduction to logic (except possibly for persons of extremely deep insight!) Of course nothing in the book is actually difficult. But the exposition is sketchy and lacks sufficient motivation. Important foundational, motivational, historical side-topics are ignored. The ideas and intuitions shaping the subject are relegated to the background of slick technical developments. As I mentioned below, these really are just notes! Most novices ought to suffer a more traditional exposure to logic first; such as reading [Enderton] or [Ebbinghaus et al.]

On the other hand, for people with *some* background and *some* mathematical inclination and *some* sense of mathematical beauty, this book is fun. The abstract approach brings out the essential features of the notions studied in logic, provides slick proofs and makes an implicit case for the unity of mathematics including mathematical logic -- which is the mathematical study of (various aspects of) mathematics itself. I personally like these "abstractions" but if you don't like them or if you don't yet have the necessary background, don't worry: There are other good logic books out there with a lighter touch.

The book deals with the elementary parts of logic, computability and set theory from an algebraic and/or "abstract" point of view. Hence it is not really suitable as a first introduction to logic (except possibly for persons of extremely deep insight!) Of course nothing in the book is actually difficult. But the exposition is sketchy and lacks sufficient motivation. Important foundational, motivational, historical side-topics are ignored. The ideas and intuitions shaping the subject are relegated to the background of slick technical developments. As I mentioned below, these really are just notes! Most novices ought to suffer a more traditional exposure to logic first; such as reading [Enderton] or [Ebbinghaus et al.]

On the other hand, for people with *some* background and *some* mathematical inclination and *some* sense of mathematical beauty, this book is fun. The abstract approach brings out the essential features of the notions studied in logic, provides slick proofs and makes an implicit case for the unity of mathematics including mathematical logic -- which is the mathematical study of (various aspects of) mathematics itself. I personally like these "abstractions" but if you don't like them or if you don't yet have the necessary background, don't worry: There are other good logic books out there with a lighter touch.

Since my previous review attracted as many "unhelpfuls" as "helpfuls," here is a clarification: If you think my previous review is too terse, don't bother buying this book. Johnstone's exposition is *extremely* terse.

The book deals with the elementary parts of logic, computability and set theory from an algebraic and/or "abstract" point of view. Hence it is not really suitable as a first introduction to logic (except possibly for persons of extremely deep insight!) Of course nothing in the book is actually difficult. But the exposition is sketchy and lacks sufficient motivation. Important foundational, motivational, historical side-topics are ignored. The ideas and intuitions shaping the subject are relegated to the background of slick technical developments. As I mentioned below, these really are just notes! Most novices ought to suffer a more traditional exposure to logic first; such as reading [Enderton] or [Ebbinghaus et al.]

On the other hand, for people with *some* background and *some* mathematical inclination and *some* sense of mathematical beauty, this book is fun. The abstract approach brings out the essential features of the notions studied in logic, provides slick proofs and makes an implicit case for the unity of mathematics including mathematical logic -- which is the mathematical study of (various aspects of) mathematics itself. I personally like these "abstractions" but if you don't like them or if you don't yet have the necessary background, don't worry: There are other good logic books out there with a lighter touch.

The book deals with the elementary parts of logic, computability and set theory from an algebraic and/or "abstract" point of view. Hence it is not really suitable as a first introduction to logic (except possibly for persons of extremely deep insight!) Of course nothing in the book is actually difficult. But the exposition is sketchy and lacks sufficient motivation. Important foundational, motivational, historical side-topics are ignored. The ideas and intuitions shaping the subject are relegated to the background of slick technical developments. As I mentioned below, these really are just notes! Most novices ought to suffer a more traditional exposure to logic first; such as reading [Enderton] or [Ebbinghaus et al.]

On the other hand, for people with *some* background and *some* mathematical inclination and *some* sense of mathematical beauty, this book is fun. The abstract approach brings out the essential features of the notions studied in logic, provides slick proofs and makes an implicit case for the unity of mathematics including mathematical logic -- which is the mathematical study of (various aspects of) mathematics itself. I personally like these "abstractions" but if you don't like them or if you don't yet have the necessary background, don't worry: There are other good logic books out there with a lighter touch.

This is an interesting book.

Not very suitable for introduction.

But good nevertheless.

I esp. like the section on computability.

The logic and set theory were a bit too short.

I agree with the Vera Suslova that this is not for beginners!

The book deals with the elementary parts of logic, computability and set theory from an algebraic and/or "abstract" point of view. Hence it is not really suitable as a first introduction to logic (except possibly for persons of extremely deep insight!) Of course nothing in the book is actually difficult. But the exposition is sketchy and lacks sufficient motivation. Important foundational, motivational, historical side-topics are ignored. The ideas and intuitions shaping the subject are relegated to the background of slick technical developments. As I mentioned below, these really are just notes! Most novices ought to suffer a more traditional exposure to logic first; such as reading [Enderton] or [Ebbinghaus et al.]

On the other hand, for people with *some* background and *some* mathematical inclination and *some* sense of mathematical beauty, this book is fun. The abstract approach brings out the essential features of the notions studied in logic, provides slick proofs and makes an implicit case for the unity of mathematics including mathematical logic -- which is the mathematical study of (various aspects of) mathematics itself. I personally like these "abstractions" but if you don't like them or if you don't yet have the necessary background, don't worry: There are other good logic books out there with a lighter touch.

This is a nice little book which covers the elements of logic and set theory. The approach is through universal algebra. It requires some previous exposure to the ideas or a good instructor to explain and motivate the development... One should not expect more from notes.

This is an interesting book.

Not very suitable for introduction.

But good nevertheless.

I esp. like the section on computability.

The logic and set theory were a bit too short.

I agree with the Vera Suslova that this is not for beginners!