Oh dear. I seem to have spent *much* more time than I meant over the last week revisiting various logic books and updating the Teach Yourself Logic Guide, and it seems to have somehow grown by another nine pages. So I’m calling a halt, and have uploaded the June version a little early. You can find it here. Do spread the word to anyone you think might have use for the Guide.

The previous, April, version has been downloaded well over 1200 times in under two months, so it certainly seems that it is worth putting the effort into the project, and it is fun (of a sort) to work on. I’ll no doubt upload another version in a couple of months. But, for the moment, I really must get back to other things.

I confess to being puzzled by the omission of Boolos’ ultimate creation logic of provability from the section on proof theory, but was reconciled by your reference to it as a wonderful modern classic in a later section.

Boolos’s book does get mentioned twice over, in the advanced modal logic section and the advanced section on stuff arising from the incompleteness theorems. But yes, fair enough, one way of carving up areas of logic would have it count as belonging to proof theory — thus Buss’s

Handbook of Proof Theoryhas an essay on provability logic.Did you manage to look at

(1) http://wwwhomes.uni-bielefeld.de/mkracht/html/tools/book.pdf

A fairly advanced treatment of modal logic.

(2) Mathematical Methods in Linguistics by Partee, Meulen and Wall (for its treatment of type theory and the lambda calculus.)?

Thanks: will try to take a look before the next update.

There’s a typo at the end of 1.3 (How to prove it) that makes the proposed informal proof a tad harder than it needs to be. The two sets are equivalent iff a=a’ and b=b’, not iff a=b and b=b’.

Thanks, noted!