🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <chomicki.717970449@antares.cis.ksu.edu.cis.ksu.edu> chomicki@cis.ksu.edu (Jan Chomicki) writes:
>I will be teaching a Set Theory and Logic course to first-year computer
>science graduate students. The course should provide them with some basic
>mathematical sophistication, as well as theorem proving skills. The
>students should already have some knowledge of mathematics, e.g.,
>calculus.
>
>I intend to cover naive and axiomatic set theory, and propositional
>and predicate logic. Specific topics include: cardinal and ordinal
>numbers, transfinite induction, ZFC, proof systems (Hilbert- and
>Gentzen-style, possibly resolution), soundness and completeness of
>proof systems, some basic model theory.
>
>I would appreciate any recommendations for or against using certain
>textbooks. I may actually use two books: one for Set Theory and one for
>Logic. Thank you.
>
>-- 
>Jan Chomicki				Computing and Information Sciences
>chomicki@cis.ksu.edu			234 Nichols Hall
>Phone: (913) 532-6350			Kansas State University
>Fax: (913) 532-7353			Manhattan, KS 66506-2302

A very impressive book is "An Introduction to Mathematical Logic and
Type Theory:  To Truth through Proof"  by Peter B. Andrews, Academic
Press, 1986.  It is a good intro to logic and model theory.  You could
use it for set theory if you were willing to do what is essentially
Russell's theory of types instead of Zermelo; if you wanted to do
Zermelo-style set theory specifically, use Halmos's Naive Set Theory?
I think that the type theory and accompanying lambda-calculus in
Andrews might be more useful for CS types.


-- 
The opinions expressed		|     --Sincerely,
above are not the "official"	|     M. Randall Holmes
opinions of any person		|     Math. Dept., Boise State Univ.
or institution.			|     holmes@opal.idbsu.edu