For courses in Formal Logic. The general approach of this book to logic remains the same as in earlier editions. Following Aristotle, we regard logic from two different points of view: on the one hand, logic is an instrument or organon for appraising the correctness of reasoning; on the other hand, the principles and methods of logic used as organon are interesting and important topics to be themselves systematically investigated.
I took this course in college using this text. It is very difficult and disappointing - not the subject but its use. Wanting to become a lawyer - which I did and have regretted it ever since - I thought I would be able to use symbolic logic to disprove my opponent's position. How naive! No one is going to sit still while you explain the incorrect tautology.
This book was a nightmare. The first third of the book is more or less basic-intermediate logic and easily understandable with a foundation in logic. But give up trying to understand the rest. It'd be possible to slog through it were Copi at all able to explain the more advanced axioms. Examples are sparse and explanations are seemingly contradictory (it's impossible to tell without examples). I asked a few senior math major friends and the math being used in this section was beyond anything they had studied. So, if you're looking for an introduction to the material, look elsewhere. The only problem is, even though it was written in the 1970's, it is still one of the only books on the subject, and used by most professors I have talked to.
This is a good, solid work on symbolic logic, but I just never have the time to finish it, as I am too busy with both work and with other books and reading material. I will write a full review as soon as I have completed it--I myself do not have a copy, and I must on every occasion use library editions.
Mentiría si dijese que disfruté esta obra. Si la adquirí se debió a que era lectura obligatoria para el curso de Lógica II, que me provocó auténticos dolores de cabeza y alguno que otro ataque de ansiedad.
Sé que no es culpa directa de Copi o de su Lógica simbólica, pero aún así formaron parte de esa experiencia de transición entre los predicados simples y los predicados con relaciones, entre las reglas simples y las reglas derivadas; y, en fin,