The Logic Book with Student Solutions Manual

Rating:
Summary: Good text, but of course with some flaws
Review: Although I concede the point of another reviewer, that perhaps the book is a bit dense and inaccessible depending on the background of the student, I have found this text to be an excellent choice. The coverage is thorough and examples and exercises are hardly lacking. In fact, some easier points are explained in what is in my opinion too much detail. My only serious complaint is that there is no glossary, and with so many definitions this is a definite disadvantage. Despite this, The Logic Book remains an adequate an INTERESTING introduction to formal logic.

Rating:
Summary: One of the worst written books I came across
Review: For Goodness sakes!!! What were Bergmann, Moor, and Nelson thinking of when they wrote this book? Morrisss you hit the nail on the head. As a philosophy student, I also have spent long hours study this book, and I don't know anyone in class who understands this unpenetrable, reader-enemy, harder to decipher than Egyptian scrolls, book. Good grief!!! I prefer to read Chinese arithmetic upside down than to decipher this book. Save your money.

Rating:
Summary: Good logic book
Review: I used this for my sophomore level logic course, as the previous reviewer. I do agree that trees get large, but I think tree is the right method for showing some statements are consistent, equivalent etc.

This book spends too many words (and examples) on the trivial issues and it is sometimes difficult to find the key points. I am very quick to get bored with trivial examples and tend to stop reading before I get all important points.

This book poorly utilizes graphics. I wish the book summarized key points using simple tables or lists. Perhaps you like to make your own graphic summary as you read (I did).

I give four stars because the coverage is good but not five because of the reasons I said above.

Rating:
Summary: Not a Classic for No Reason
Review: It is unfortunate that Mr. Morriss had such difficulty with his logic course, especially since he is both a philosophy student and has been able to maintain a respectable GPA. As any student of philosophy knows, however, any one of a number of things could have brought about the 'D' on the midterm for the unfortunate fifty percent of his fellow students.

My experience with this text and (perhaps, therefore) with my undergraduate logic class in general was considerably more enjoyable than Mr. Morriss's experience. Certainly my professor was very good at presenting the material, but presumably he was not making up for a poorly written book. For, when I needed to consult the text, I found it actually to be quite clear and helpful.

Turning to the book itself, since I am not a fan of truth trees, when I have the opportunity to teach my own logic course, I will utilize proofs. I have viewed many undergraduate logic texts, and the proof method presented in this text seems the clearest.

Furthermore, as my logic professor told me and his professor told him: Logic is not in the head; it's in the fingers. Therefore, I think that the considerable amount of exercises contained in this text is greatly beneficial.

Third, definitions of terms and important points are presented clearly in text boxes throughout the book. Students will benefit greatly by committing these terms and points to memory.

Finally, although the price is prohibitive (hence, four stars), Bergmann, Moor, and Nelson's text has withstood the test of time. (In fact, the 4th edition is supposed to be out this summer.) Such evidence is not conclusive, but it suggests that perhaps lying behind Mr. Morriss's frustration is a cause more complex than merely this classic text.

Rating:
Summary: If your instructor requires this book, get ready for TROUBLE
Review: This book has cost me innumerable hours of frustration and grief. It appears as though it was written to be intentionally vague, as if the authors only desired to display their own prowess at their subject, with very little regard for pedagogy. One gets the feeling that the authors are merely stating facts about Sentential Logic rather than devising pedagogical tactics to make the subject easy to learn by students of all levels. None of these criticisms take into account the equally frustrating, but less important fact, that the book is riddled with typographical errors and inaccuracies, of which I have been enumerating and will reveal on my web site soon.

I am a philosophy junior at the University of Arizona and my GPA is 3.89. Suffice it to say that my problems with this book are probably not because I am a moron; however, if you don't believe that, then for more evidence consider that roughly 50% of the class using this book scored a "D" or worse on the midterm.

Sentential Logic crosses into several different disciplines. It is a component of course tracks for computer science majors, philosophy majors, and of course mathematics majors. It is a terrible mistake to have written a book that appears to assume that its audience is highly inclined towards mathematics, and that simple, straightforward explanations of the material are unnecessary.

As a student who is also a working adult professional, this book has cost me money far above its purchase price. I have spent numerous hours wasting my professor's precious time asking for clarifications and searching the web for alternative publications and sites with assistance. When you are a working adult, having such a vague and poorly written textbook takes hours away from the times that I could be out earning a living while earning my degree. To be fair, nearly all college textbooks are over-priced. However, this one has failed to perform so badly that the price stings even worse.

To instructors seeking to use this book, I caution you against doing so unless you are merely going to use it as an outline for your lectures and you intend to spend a great deal of class time and office hours working with students. Take into consideration, for instance, that the introduction to Sentential Derivation is a mere two pages long before it piles deep into rules without answering even the most basic of questions such as why we're even doing derivation at all!

To the student, I caution you to drop your course if this book is the required text. If you can take the course somewhere else or with a different instructor who uses a different text, then you should do it. Otherwise, plan to spend time with your professor during office hours and plenty of time trying to figure out SL/SD on your own or with a tutor.

Rating:
Summary: Was Moriss Thinking?
Review: This book has remained in my library (thumbed to pieces, which is why I now seek a new copy) since I took symbolic logic in the summer of 1995 on the way to my undergraduate degree at Arizona State University. I have to say that out of the many logic texts I have seen, this is by far one of the finest around. I won't belabor any of the excellent points made by the gentleman from Lubbock, Texas, but I will add that this is an immaculate reference for any student of logic, though he or she should have the benefit of being able to seek the guidance of a seasoned professional should difficulties arise.

Contrary to my compatriot from Lubbock,though, I find the time spent on truth trees to be entirely beneficial. While the derivations are definitely the grandest exercise in formal logic, their focus on the validity or invalidity of an argument leaves them to fail to show the one thing that truth trees reveal, that is, the truth conditions of any given proposition.

Please do not let the naysayers detract you from using this book as a text if you are undertaking the task of teaching logic. It is rather common that symbolic logic is the ruination of many a philosophy major's GPA. For me, however, I found this book extremely easy to follow and comprehend. The ample exercises, most with answers and explanations provided, only add to the worth of this classic text. Few logic books can compare with this fine instrument.

Rating:
Summary: not concise, but still a good learning aide
Review: This book might be a good addition to the library of a self-studier who has an ample amount of time or perhaps has little experience in logic or mathematics. Its explicitness really helps on the more difficult chapters, although this can frustrate, too, because it's hard to study when the rules aren't laid out in one particular spot. But overall, it's not so bad.

Rating:
Summary: The Logic Book
Review: What an AWFUL book! Very reader "unfriendly". I had to use this book for a symbolic logic course at the University of Alberta. I found it very frustrating because the examples were few and far between, and were not explained well at all. One has to "guess" an awful lot. Don't even bother with the accompanying solutions booklet. Couple this book with an equally vague prof, and you will not be a happy camper! Now that I'm done University, I'm selling mine......another student can now be frustrated to no end.