Very interesting course

But some parts are not just to technical but rather for technicians and not for persons looking more into the theoretical aspects

Course is fine but there isn't much material for INTRODUCTION. Good Math Skills Required.

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

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

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

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

虽然不容易，但还是做到了。生活中逻辑很重要，希望大家来学。论坛中大家都很好，给了我很大帮助。

A little difficult to understand.

great

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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 !

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

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

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

And is too expensive.

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

A little too slow for my liking

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??

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.

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.

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...