# 学生对 斯坦福大学 提供的 逻辑学导论 的评价和反馈

4.5
565 个评分
122 条评论

## 课程概述

This course is an introduction to Logic from a computational perspective. It shows how to encode information in the form of logical sentences; it shows how to reason with information in this form; and it provides an overview of logic technology and its applications - in mathematics, science, engineering, business, law, and so forth....

## 热门审阅

JS

Aug 21, 2018

This course was so helpful. I think I now understand the fundamentals of mathematical logic. I truly recommend this course to anyone who is interested in studying logic!

SC

May 01, 2018

Pros:\n\n1.good contents\n\n2.good exercises and interesting puzzles\n\n3.good examples\n\nCons:\n\n1.No video\n\n2. need more examples

## 76 - 逻辑学导论 的 100 个评论（共 116 个）

Jan 24, 2017

Videos to explain the materials would be much more useful than how it is right now...

Mar 05, 2018

The Fitch tool can be easily hacked if now premise are in the task. Please fix this!

Nov 17, 2016

This has been a very interesting course, introducing the basic of logic reasoning.

Jan 26, 2019

The course is great, but the grading system is always broken.

Dec 11, 2017

Oct 07, 2017

A little difficult to understand.

Jan 08, 2017

great

Sep 01, 2020

Quite engaging for a predominantly text-based course. However, what I struggled with towards the end was determining application areas for the theory that I was going through. After completing the proofs of Week 8, I lost momentum and the drive to want to imbibe more theory without any outlet for application. This is obviously not to say that there aren't application areas. However, the course can do more to communicate those to the students.

Aug 20, 2018

I have found it not extremely clear in the latter part of the course, perhaps more examples would help. Most of the section 1 to 9 (from propositional logic to relational logic and Herbrand logic) are quite clear and straight-forward. An historical background of who, when and why theories and computing methodologies were elaborated would certainly increase interest.

Dec 01, 2016

I love the content overall. However, I'm very disappointed that there are no video lectures at all. Ironically, I could find some old video lectures of this course on YouTube. The difficulty of this course warrants video lectures to convey many concepts and techniques, such as the Fitch system.

Hopefully you can add video lectures back to this course.

Apr 20, 2018

Video demonstrations would have been more helpful. I like to feel engaged, lectured to and encouraged to communicate with fellow students. I feel that this class really helped me a lot, but then I began to lose interest very quickly because of its format.

Apr 20, 2019

Unfortunately there are several problems with the external tool, although the course is very complete, the presentations of the slides are very short, they would need more development, to be more friendly with the reader.

Dec 12, 2017

A solid entry-level course about Formal Logic. May be more enticing to students intimidated by the more math-based approach of Intro to Mathematical Thinking (also by Stanford University).

Sep 18, 2017

the examples are far from enough! For a non-native speaker,it's quite hard to learn all these notions .please add some examples into it !

Mar 02, 2017

Bare bones. Pros: mostly clear, Cons: it may require outside supplements to fully understand and complete the assignments.

Aug 07, 2017

A little bit more interative course would be more interesting. On the other hand is a very complete course.

Oct 17, 2016

Reading and only reading! Could have at least a voice, some interaction!

And is too expensive.

Mar 24, 2019

After the chapter 7 explanations may appear rather vague, that hampers understanding

Nov 09, 2016

A little too slow for my liking

Jan 09, 2018

not having videos on this course is just lazy. It's the internet !! You do them once and they last for a life time!! No maintenance and all. So why not have video lectures to this course? The textbook is quite technical, compared to other texts that i have encountered, lectures would have been quite helpful.

Also, please note that a certificate for this course costs 95\$!!! that's an outrage!!! Is a course with no video really worth that much??

Jan 14, 2017

I would like more tasks to help learn, it's also really really easy to guess your way to the right answer. A _lot_ of concepts, words and specific tools are introduced, with not much opportunity to actually use them meaningfully and feel that one has actually learned a skill (as opposed to temporarily remembered the concepts for the quiz). Was nice not to have to watch videos though, and the slides are good.

Dec 11, 2016

overall: some weeks were fun, some not

in some weeks are too many chapters and exercises. I actually think that the exercises are too complicated compared to the examples in the chapters. Sometimes are the explanations in the chapters not sufficient.

It would be helpful to know the name of a proof e.g. Perch's Law or law of (the) excluded middle. This would help to find more information and help.

Nov 22, 2017

Very interesting subject matter. Most chapters are very well presented and explained, allowing the student to explore other uses of the content. The chapters involving Fitch proofs are pretty useless or frustrating, depending on the student's level of commitment. Little explanation of what is expected, what procedures to follow, where one has erred along the way...

May 27, 2017

As for someone who needs to understand it more, I recommend part about Digital Circuites as I have understanding of most of its basics from this course. Also sorority word, entailment and boolean, non-boolean models. The rest of material dis not give me explanation sufficient to have full understanding. I would need more video visualization of all topics!

Dec 08, 2016

I initially found the week two section very frustrating due to the absence of worded examples (real sentences) that might've appeared alongside the logic-symbols that were being defined. I would put it down to a personal fault, if it were not the case that I grasped the notation fully within minutes of finding another source of learning.