Logic: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) [Tapa blanda]

I am a novice in logic. But I need logic--some of it sophisticated--to understand a philosophy paper I am working with.
I found Graham Priestly's Logic, a Very Short Introduction superb and immensely helpful. I searched full-length texts, but I knew I would never wade through them. I didn't want to take the time for a college course. I searched the Web and found some excellent material, ... However, Graham's book proved far and away the simplest and best.
Here are the advantages I found. Some advantages are simply due to the brevity of the book that suited my needs, but some stand out in any context.
1. The book goes into topics early-truth tables and modal logic, for example. Copi's Introduction to Logic, while undoubtedly very good, and used in many logic courses, does not get to truth tables until Chapter 10 while Priest starts using truth tables in Chapter 2, page 9. Another text, Stephan Layman's The Power of Logic, did not get to modal logic until about page 450. Graham starts the topic in chapter 6, page 38, about 1/3 of the way through his book.
2. The book had every single logic symbol that I needed. I found no one book, full-length text or web source that did this. Equally important every symbol was used and discussed somewhere in the book. Some symbols were missing or introduced very late in other books.
3. Graham doesn't spoon feed the reader with great detail like other books, nor employ elaborate introduction to a topic.
4. Logic, a Very Short Introduction is about 10% the length of other books I looked at (Copi & Layman were about 550-650 pages, for example)-considering Graham's page size is probably  that of a normal book. Other books cost roughly 3 to 8 as much.
5. Graham has a very clear, engaging, and often humorous, style. The book is very well organized and written.
6. It is easy to get into meat quickly.
7. In a little over 100 pages, Priest uses a given chapter's logic to analyze a variant form of several classical philosophical questions. For example: the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God, fatalism, the Ontological Argument for the Existence of God, the Argument from Design for God's existence, etc.
8. The book has an unusual amount of supplemental material-brief history of logic, glossary, list of symbols, problems ..., bibliography, general index and index of names.
9. Every chapter ends with a simple summary of the ideas it covers. There were numerous figures.
10. There were 13 illustrations ranging from cartoons, to art, to famous philosophers.
Of course, this is a short survey and so no one should think that any one topic is covered in depth. Breadth rather than depth is the book's objective.
The book could be used by:
1. Self learners
2. People taking a logic course who want a quick overview or supplement
3. People, who would like rudimentary familiarity with logic for their work, but do not need a college course or a full-length logic book.
...

For its length and breadth, I'd recommend this little book to most people. I teach a course on Logic, and even I learned a bit from this short introduction.

The worry, however, is that Priest takes this book as an opportunity to push his own non-standard view on formal logic, which is why a better title for this book would be `A short Introduction to Priest's Logic'.

Most immediately evident is that Priest uses many of the chapters as a place to show how an argument for the existence of god. For example, much of the chapter on predicate logic is devoted to showing the fallacy inherent in the cosmological argument for the existence of god. His chapter on decision theory is in part devoted to showing how Pascal's wager goes wrong.

Probably even more subversive is that, in an introductory level logic book, Priest presents his own unorthodox solutions to paradoxes in logic. For example, to solve the problem of self-reference, he presents his own view regarding four valued logics, without even a word explaining that not only is this not the standard view, it's not even a very popular one. He also offers fuzzy logic as a solution of vagueness and sorites paradoxes.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book, and would offer it to any friend interested in a brief introduction to some advanced topics in logic. But I'll be sure to emphasize that much of what he offers for solutions is hardly accepted by mainstream analytic philosophy. Priest took advantage of this chance to write an introductory level text as an opportunity to push his own views, and anyone reading this should be aware of this fact before beginning.

This is just the book to whet one's appetite for a deeper engagement in logic. Priest's little book has short, clearly written chapters on validity, truth functions, quantifiers, descriptions, self-reference, modal operators, conditionals, tenses, identity, vagueness, inductive logic, and decision theory. Virtually every chapter shows how interesting philosophical problems arise from or are tied in with logic. The only possible drawback to the book is that new initiates to the philosophical foundations of logic are likely to never again have a good night's sleep after Priest introduces them to some of the classic puzzles.