Hands down, best class I've ever taken at UCLA. I loved this class, so I'm biased, but I'll try to give you the most helpful review.
PROS:
- Levy's lectures are very clear and helpful
- Abundant tutors and tutoring sessions, lots of good opportunities to get help
- All the assignments, tests, practice is done on Logic 2010 Software, so class is super organized and well -structured, you always know what to expect.
- Gives practice exams that almost follow exam structure exactly
- Levy is a cute grandpa who genuinely loves teaching
CONS:
- Workload is kind of heavy, HW assignments due twice a week, each can take up to 3-4 hours.
- Symbolic Logic doesn't come easy to some, you might struggle more than others, or be bored
Advice:
- Go to all the lectures, do all the HW, and make sure you understand what you're doing
- In the week leading up to the exam, do all the practice questions in the Logic 2010 Software, might seem like overkill, but it's super doable, and you'll be so much better prepared for the exams
If you absolutely despise math, maybe skip out on this class, symbolic logic is like a spin off of math, and you might not enjoy it.

This was a very difficult class, but Professor Levy made it worthwhile. His lectures were always engaging, fun, and informative. If you want an A in this class, you must go to office hours and show up for lecture. He does not record his lectures.

Lot of disgruntled people talking about how hard the class is. Logic isn't for everybody, but Steve Levy is. He's experienced, helpful, accommodating, and he wholeheartedly believes in your ability to grasp the concepts and will help you get there.

I ended up graduating UCLA summa cum lade this year in a stem field. Upon reflection, this is the absolute hardest class I took at UCLA. The pacing was god awful, it goes far too in-depth to be a GE, the expectation that you attend instruction on weekends was absurd. Many people dropped and took it P/NP.

I'm currently in the process of wrapping up my LSAT studies and this class (and formal logic in general) contributes absolutely nothing to one's understanding of that test. Again, there is NO SECTION of the LSAT that requires you to understand formal logic. Derivations and logical phrasing are not useful in any way, shape or form for legal thinking or the LSAT. This class is good for one thing only: pursuing a logic concentration in philosophy at UCLA. It should not be advertised as a class that prepares someone for Law School or the LSAT.

I'd discourage almost anyone from taking this class.

This class is hilariously easy if you understand logic. The prof is slow and old but you don't need to watch all the lectures to do well.

this course is pretty much discrete math at a very basic level but from a linguistic/rhetorical perspective so take it if you like that and don't take it if you don't. concepts felt pretty straightforward. homework is due through a dated-looking application called "logic" but the problems are very targeted (not too repetitive except at beginning) and helpful so it's clear that prof has taught this course a fair amount of times
s levy is a very kind, affable, and humorous person and you can tell he wants to help everyone do well despite the large amount of students in class (over 300). trust him and pls laugh at his frequent jokes

The two other reviewers for this quarter are pathetic. If you are serious about academics, then regardless of protests or pandemic, you would have been enthusiastic about this time-tested class.

Indeed, there were some mishaps with the exams, but overall, I would 100% recommend this course to anyone interested in logic, philosophy, or law school.

I really enjoyed this class. As a humanities and social science double major, it was unlike any other class I've taken at UCLA but the challenge was very satisfying. Professor Levy is very passionate about teaching and there are a lot of resources available to help students succeed in the course. The TA, Seungtaek, was excellent as well. This course didn't fulfill any requirements for me, but I think overall it was less work for me than most of my other classes. There are two mandatory homework assignments each week, two midterms, and a final. The textbook is free and linked on the class site. It's helpful for review but I found attending lecture and the discussion section to be essential to my understanding of the material. I found doing the homework to actually be quite enjoyable. It's a lot like solving puzzles, especially derivations. This was probably one of my favorite classes I've taken at UCLA.

I really enjoyed this class. As a humanities and social science double major, it was unlike any other class I've taken at UCLA but the challenge was very satisfying. Professor Levy is very passionate about teaching and there are a lot of resources available to help students succeed in the course. The TA, Seungtaek, was excellent as well. This course didn't fulfill any requirements for me, but I think overall it was less work for me than most of my other classes. There are two mandatory homework assignments each week, two midterms, and a final. The textbook is free and linked on the class site. It's helpful for review but I found attending lecture and the discussion section to be essential to my understanding of the material. I found doing the homework to actually be quite enjoyable. It's a lot like solving puzzles, especially derivations. This was probably one of my favorite classes I've taken at UCLA.

Took this class to fulfill my final pre-req requirement for being a philosophy major. Overall, it was not that bad for me considering the fact that I could get most of what we were learning even though I would not attend lectures. Attendance is not mandatory for either lecture or discussion section, but it is highly recommended by Levy to do so. You learn about validity, symbolizations (phrasing of the symbolization sentences can be hella confusing), derivations (just tedious b/c a lot of rules to use but will become easier when you remember them), truth tables (the easiest section), and invalidities (most confusing).

You're graded on the following: your homework that's due before the next class, two midterms, and a final. Homework is doable, I definitely recommend joining the GroupMe chat for the class since most people help each other out there. The midterms are okay, you get the entire lecture session to do them, make sure your laptop is charged and that it can run Logic 2010 properly, it can crash sometimes. You learn about invalidities by like the last weeks of this quarter, but there's only two questions about them on the final. Our TA (Seungtaek) for this quarter was helpful and had useful handouts that he would pass out during discussion sections and had a google drive for which was nice.

It definitely is more of a math class than a typical "philosophy" one where you mainly discuss and analyze readings. I'm not sure why some people feel a bit like they were lied to about the course, and I think most of the complaints come from the Covid/Zoom era so I guess that didn't go well. I will say Levy is super nice and friendly, but the way he lectures can be confusing especially with his quirky powerpoints. He does not record his lectures but he does share his powerpoints; however, these are difficult to follow if you weren't there for lecture. If you're really struggling, the tutors are usually available (either in-person or over zoom), but some tutors are better than others. I would say it's a fast pace class, but if you put in the effort to try to understand the content it is doable. I will warn you that you'll probably get confused about invalidities and not feel confident about symbolizations so try your best to figure it out.