From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!att!linac!uwm.edu!ogicse!das-news.harvard.edu!husc-news.harvard.edu!widder!zeleny Thu Apr 30 15:22:05 EDT 1992
Article 5198 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:5198 sci.logic:1171
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!att!linac!uwm.edu!ogicse!das-news.harvard.edu!husc-news.harvard.edu!widder!zeleny
>From: zeleny@widder.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
Subject: Understanding Logic (was re: Godel Incompleteness Theorm)
Message-ID: <1992Apr22.124607.11418@husc3.harvard.edu>
Date: 22 Apr 92 16:46:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Apr22.124607.11418
References: <1992Apr22.010037.21305@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Organization: Dept. of Math, Harvard Univ.
Lines: 58
Nntp-Posting-Host: widder.harvard.edu

In article <1992Apr22.010037.21305@watdragon.waterloo.edu> 
wlfong@logos.waterloo.edu (Philip W. L. Fong) writes:

>Recently I posted a request for introductory references on Godel Incompleteness
>Theorm.  I received a lot of replies, and I would like to thank
>all who reponded to the posting.  Attached is a list of the replies I
>received.  Some of them contain bibliographical information that you
>may be interested in.  If you would like to suggest more introductory
>references on Godel's Theorm, please forward them to me at
>wlfong@logos.waterloo.edu.  Thank you again.
>
>Philip

>[...]

>Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 12:11:02 -0400
>From: tkprasad@valhalla.cs.wright.edu (Thirunarayan Krishnaprasad)
       __________________^^___________
>
>
>You can read "Godel Escher Bach" by Douglas Hofstader
>and "Godel's Proof" by Nagel and ...
>Both have extremely informal and palatable treatment of
>Incompleteness theorem. The former is a Pulitzer Prize Winner.
>The latter book was written in 1950's and is NYU Press I think.
>You can also look at "Metamagical Themas" by the first author
>for an article on self-reference. 
>
>Avoid looking at First-order logic text books. Even though I work in
>logic, I understood more from the informal descriptions than the gory
>proof in Enderton!
>
>Good Luck.
>Prasad
>

You might want to consider a career change.  Although not a single one
among my students in the Harvard Extension introductory logic class
professes to "work in logic", none among them have failed to understand
"the gory proof in Enderton".

On second thought, the department name in your address explains everything.

>[...]

I am crossposting this to sci.logic, so Herb Enderton can enjoy it, too.

`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
: Qu'est-ce qui est bien?  Qu'est-ce qui est laid?         Harvard   :
: Qu'est-ce qui est grand, fort, faible...                 doesn't   :
: Connais pas! Connais pas!                                 think    :
:                                                             so     :
: Mikhail Zeleny                                                     :
: 872 Massachusetts Ave., Apt. 707                                   :
: Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139           (617) 661-8151            :
: email zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu or zeleny@HUMA1.BITNET            :
:                                                                    :
'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`


