Most Helpful Customer Reviews
Meaning and Argument: An Introduction to Logic Through Language based on 0 ratings. 1 reviews.
For the potential buyer who is thinking in buying this text book, I will say that I used it for a semester in my teaching logic. I will not use it more. The good: plenty of examples to practice logic. The bad: no philosophical interest. Pedagogically is mediocre. The author does not understand the way students learn logic. This book is not different from the other hundreds of logic text books in our century. Nothing to offer from the original Copi, "introduction to logic", from where is an uninspired copy. And with similar mistakes than the original Copi, whose most annoying issues is the way they understand particulars, the existential quantifier, induction, classical logic, conditionals, etc. There are many other logic texts for beginners that are better written for students. However, I was, in some way, present when the author, Ernie, started to write this book (1998?) based on his personal teaching experience, at Rutgers University, and I have to say that the method of the book fits Ernie's style, but it does not work well for teachers who are very interactive with the student. The methodology of the book is very static, it does not move with fluidity, it is more a book for the teacher than for the student. "Meaning and Argument" is essentially practical (almost as a cook book) and it does not explain concepts very well, so it is more another technological book of logic than a philosophical book of logic. There is very little philosophical insight in what is an inference, conditional, etc., it tells you how to cook an argument (some of them are problematic in my opinion), but it does not teach you how to think logically, and it is not well written to think philosophically. The book is good in translating natural language into the artificial formal language of symbolic logic that is standard in the US, but unfortunately it continues the (cripple) tradition, from Russell, to translate universals into conditionals in a way I have doubts, existential quantifiers as real existence, etc., which conceal an uncritical metaphysics (a very naive metaphysics in my opinion). I noticed that this text book has good reviews from all the people in the same (parochial) circle, I doubt that outside of this narrow circle there is interest in a book that is supposed to reach everybody interested in logic.