Scan barcode
skeeter4366's review against another edition
2.0
I think it wasn't thaaaat interesting to me as an actual mathematician. It was basically logic 101 for non math majors it felt. One of those where I read most of it and considered that reading it enough.
anna_lucille's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.75
The structure of the book works spectacularly in the form of a mathematical proof, starting with basic premises to build to the larger scheme of reconciling the limits of logical and emotional thought. Using real-world controversy really drives the point and is perfect for a reader looking to understand others' or their own internal processes and constructive communication. Loved the bit lamenting math education in a multi-faceted way, I've felt the same for a long time! I took off a partial star bc the end got a little weird with the sheer amount of times she referenced her weight and not wanting to be fat. i felt weird reading that part. Otherwise great thought-provoking read, discussing conceptual abstract material in an accessible and entertaining way.
beeeenerys's review against another edition
funny
informative
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
I was recommended this book via a tiktok video talking about how it benefitted the OP as an autistic person and I GET IT! There's so much i don't understand about neurotypical communication and this book has helped me get to the root of it using some very helpful diagrams and analogies. The analogies also discuss some serious social issues at times to understand where they come from and the different types of reactions that occur.
I had an understanding of grey areas in logic and social issues before but definitely not to the extent Cheng takes it to.
I had an understanding of grey areas in logic and social issues before but definitely not to the extent Cheng takes it to.
calyxconcision's review against another edition
5.0
This book intimidated me with its mathematical structures at first, but is actually easily followable. I love this book. It has helped me to make clearer, more concise arguments in life - and in my coursework, where argument is essential.
rory11's review against another edition
5.0
Once again, Eugenia Cheng manages to write a math book that is so much more than a math book. If we were able to share ideas like these in math classrooms, there would be far fewer students claiming that "they just aren't math people."
ranahabib's review against another edition
4.0
Rating: 7.5/10, maybe an 8 (might re-read it before giving a final rating)
Cheng approaches logic from a mathematical standpoint, showing readers that with a balance of logic and emotion, we can strengthen critical thinking, communication, and relationships.
The book is split into three parts:
P1: The foundations of logic
P2: The limits of logic
P3: Beyond logic
I agree with Cheng's notion that there should be a healthy balance between logic and emotion when dealing with situations in the real world; too much of either can only limit thinking.
I really liked the use of relevant examples and diagrams to help readers understand the material better.
I found part 3 the most interesting, which explores beyond logic by analyzing concepts like intuition, emotion, equivalence, axioms, and grey areas.
Although I found most chapters interesting, at times I found Cheng's writing to be a little difficult to follow and very me-centric.
Maybe this is the fault of my own comprehension but for some chapters in part 1, I was constantly searching on Google for easier ways to explain what was being taught. Although she was teaching very basic level concepts, her explanations were really longwinded. It was almost like she took really simple concepts and made them more difficult than they had to be (ex. negations, contrapositives, converses: all really simple ideas that were made complex)
I also wasn't a fan of how me-centric Cheng's writing is. The entire book was built on her politics, ideologies, and beliefs, which is fine to a certain extent. In this case, Cheng really overdid it, which took away from the book.
Cheng approaches logic from a mathematical standpoint, showing readers that with a balance of logic and emotion, we can strengthen critical thinking, communication, and relationships.
The book is split into three parts:
P1: The foundations of logic
P2: The limits of logic
P3: Beyond logic
I agree with Cheng's notion that there should be a healthy balance between logic and emotion when dealing with situations in the real world; too much of either can only limit thinking.
I really liked the use of relevant examples and diagrams to help readers understand the material better.
I found part 3 the most interesting, which explores beyond logic by analyzing concepts like intuition, emotion, equivalence, axioms, and grey areas.
Although I found most chapters interesting, at times I found Cheng's writing to be a little difficult to follow and very me-centric.
Maybe this is the fault of my own comprehension but for some chapters in part 1, I was constantly searching on Google for easier ways to explain what was being taught. Although she was teaching very basic level concepts, her explanations were really longwinded. It was almost like she took really simple concepts and made them more difficult than they had to be (ex. negations, contrapositives, converses: all really simple ideas that were made complex)
I also wasn't a fan of how me-centric Cheng's writing is. The entire book was built on her politics, ideologies, and beliefs, which is fine to a certain extent. In this case, Cheng really overdid it, which took away from the book.
rachelbret13's review against another edition
4.0
overall i really loved this book! i found it humorous, illuminating, and precise. not at all pedantic. which is not the same as precise. (the girls that get it, get it). it was a really fun read and got me thinking a little out of my comfort zone! it's always good to take inventory of the way you think, and this book really helped me get tools i think i'll be able to use in the future to investigate the logical flow of my own arguments and those of others.
i unfortunately had to knock it down a point bc i did not vibe with her seemingly endless commentary about how she didn't want to gain weight. it's like we get it. but it's still worth a read just kinda skim over those parts.
i unfortunately had to knock it down a point bc i did not vibe with her seemingly endless commentary about how she didn't want to gain weight. it's like we get it. but it's still worth a read just kinda skim over those parts.