Logic: An Introduction to Elementary Logic

by Wilfrid Hodges

If a man supports Arsenal one day and Spurs the next, then he is fickle but not necessarily illogical. From this starting point, and assuming no previous knowledge of logic, Wilfrid Hodges takes the reader through the whole gamut of logical expressions in a simple and lively way. Readers who are more mathematically adventurous will find optional sections introducing rather more challenging material.

Genres: Philosophy, Logic, Nonfiction, Science, Mathematics, Reference, Academic

304 pages, Paperback

First published August 28, 1980

Reviews

[Shafi Sardar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Was very fun to read!! Pro tip: do the excersizes.

It /was/ an elementary introduction to Logic!

[Honest · Rating 5 out of 5]

The first edition of this book has always been my very favorite of the dozens of introductory logic books that I have read. The man is funny and knows his stuff. He doesn't abstract until the move is motivated or introduce formalities until they can be tied to something meaningful. It might be easier for a teacher to lay out the results, the worked-out system, and start explaining the pieces, and this is what plenty of authors do, but I find that a more difficult way to learn. Hodges starts with what every child knows and lets things develop. He talks to you rather than at you.

I'll add more about what is covered when I get my copy of this edition. If I recall correctly, he doesn't include a deduction system, and he probably doesn't cover enough to satisfy someone interested in mathematical logic. This is the best place to start, though, and should provide enough comfort and understanding to easily proceed to other books. It might be perfect for people whose main interest isn't math or logic but a related field, e.g., philosophy, law, or linguistics.

The first edition had optional advanced or mathy sections marked off for your pleasure or passing. He also includes detailed explanations in the back to every single problem, which is especially wonderful for us independent learners. The serious student might finish the book in a week. (It's tiny.)

[Abhishek Kona · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great book for the introduction of various notations of logic and basic techniques to establish statements as logical.

It is mathematical and you have to work through it. I though, cannot think of a lot of practical uses of it.

The book in itself is enjoyable.

[Justin Evans · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solid intro to logic, which goes about its task in a (for me) odd way. Rather than teaching you a system of propositional calculus, then moving onto predicate logic, it kind of sort of recapitulates the reasons one might develop a propositional calculus in the first place, working from sentences and consistency, rather than arguments. I have no idea how you'd do with this if you hadn't done some logic, but it makes for a good refresher. As ever in these books, some of the answers are either flat out wrong, or feature typos. I don't mind that. Proofreading this stuff must be a nightmare.

[Alexandre Guay]

Ce livre d'introduction à la logique n'est pas approprié comme manuel pour un cours d'introduction à la logique formelle ou mathématique. Cependant, il est particulièrement bien fait pour introduire les étudiants à la logique tout court. La quasi-absence de formalisation permet une entrée douce au lecteur inconfortable avec la symbolisation. Je le recommande à tout étudiant débutant. De plus il est très peu cher...

[Kulveer · Rating 4 out of 5]

if you're interested in language, and arguments, this is worth reading.

be warned, it can lead to you randomly finding ambiguities where there are none in everyday talk, and, can make you an argumentative (and pedantic) person.

[Amber · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dit boek over Logic heb ik gelezen voor mijn studie filosofie. Van tevoren had ik best wel wat schrik voor dit vak (en het bijbehorende tentamen), maar dat is door dit boek helemaal weggenomen. Het is namelijk op een 'populaire' manier geschreven en dus las ik dit boek ook bijna gewoon voor mijn plezier. Er staan oefeningen in zodat je zeker weet dat je snapt waar de tekst over gaat.

Erg fijn boek als je benieuwd bent hoe logica nou eigenlijk werkt. Ik had overigens ook nooit verwacht dat iemand hier iets humoristisch van zou kunnen maken. Is wel gelukt.

Het blijft natuurlijk wel logica, dus het is niet echt een page-turner... ;-)

[Steven Wilson · Rating 2 out of 5]

I perhaps expected too much. This book is very math and symbol oriented, and very much focused on how to apply rigid rules to grammar. Helpful tools, but, for me, not really an overview of the subject itself. Too long on process, too short on ideas and applications.

[Ladyfilosopher · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was our course book during my undergraduate studies in philosophy. Critical thinking is essential to bridging the diversity of our discussions and points of view.

[Nathan Ormond · Rating 4 out of 5]

A brilliant systematic introduction to philosophical and mathematical logic.

[Andrew Alterman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting insight" but vert technical at times

[Felix U-O · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's fun and quirky, but not the easiest to follow.

[Philip · Rating 4 out of 5]

More math than I wanted

[Enya · Rating 4 out of 5]

Super interesting (some of it went over my head!), and really enjoyed the author’s voice and sense of humor. Logic exercises throughout the book

[Conor Sheehan · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting book, but I think some of the exercises could have different answers.

E.g. 3A 3. "Pass me a butter" is marked grammatically incorrect as a "preturbation of pass me the butter".

I think it could be considered grammatically correct. E.g. you are in a hotel that has many small packets of butter. Saying "pass me a butter" would work fine in that context.

Some later solutions include a note "some may be controversial" but that probably applies to most really.

E.g. 6 10. The adjective full is not scaling. I.e. "fuller or more full" is invalid. Something is either full or it's not.

I disagree because then you can't describe something partially full. Is the glass half full or half empty? Well we can't say half full because full is non-scaling. Empty must also be non-scaling then. I.e. a container must contain nothing to be empty. a container must be completely filled to be full. So now our glass is undescribable, neither half full nor half empty.

[Griffith · Rating 4 out of 5]

A gem of a book. Don’t be fooled by the title, though it says it’s introductory it belongs to the subset of harder introductory logic books.

[Lucas Gili · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book was first published in 1977 and is published by Penguin. I thought the book was good although the explanations and information was very short. Sometimes a topic was mentioned, the minimal amount of information is then given when I thought more information would have helped to come to understand the topic better, I guess I wanted a bit more than an introduction.

I learnt many things from the book and as a newcomer to elementary logic it took me a while to accustom myself to reading formulae and tableau. Some of the examples and exercises tested my brain. Once I had reached the last 20 pages I had reached a new understanding and could work out the examples a lot more easier than when I started. I plan to move straight on to another logic book and see how I go.

If you're a beginner looking to learn about elementary logic and the meanings/definitions of the symbols and learn the rules to able to construct formulas and tableaux and gain a deeper understanding of logic then I'd recommend it.

[Ahmad A. · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is by far one of the best introductions to Logic. It was written as a First Course on Logic. The book is dense, and full of exercises (almost 80).
I like the book's progression, it starts off by reasoning about logical concepts in ordinary language, and then developing the case for Propositional Logic and First-Order Predicate Logic, it finishes with a 18-paged chapter on topics such as Liklihood, Intension, Modal Logic and Semantics.

I give the book 4 stars becuase the chapter on Predicate Logic was shorter more than it should be, and it left the solutions to the exercises somehow hard to grasp. I think if the chapter was extended a little bit more, it would have been definitely a 5-stars book!!

[K · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was recommended for an introductory course in formal logic.

This book is a solid introduction to propositional and predicate logic. Hodges is a good logician, with many philosophical sensitivities - this shows in his brief treatment of various 'controversial' or 'bizarre' aspects of contemporary logic. I got a lot out of this book, particularly due to the vast number of exercises ranging from implementing phrase structure rules on natural language, to truth tables and predicate tableaux. One apparent problem is that Hodges introduces natural language tableaux from very early on, and that can be quite confusing for the beginner who hasn't grasped the relevant rules. Thus, I had to consult another book that introduced tableaux AFTER truth-tables - it worked!

[Tony · Rating 3 out of 5]

This may well be a good book but it lost me after about the third chapter. I knew very little about logic before starting and a little bit more now, but as an introduction it wasn't that much help. One difficulty was that new information would be introduced in the sol;unions; so the author would set an exercise, which relied on material that he didn't explain except in the solution to the exercise. That's frustrating. It may be that this book is better for readers who know some logic , rather than novices like me.

[J · Rating 5 out of 5]

Witty and patient. Particularly keen on the slippages and ambiguities between natural language expression and formalisation. My only complaint is Hodge's use of the tableau method for proofs, rather than natural deduction, which seems more popular, and to my eyes, more intuitive.