8 a.m. class. That alone should have scared me away from this class, but I thought I could handle it. I was wrong. This class sucked, for me. It's nothing what I expected it to be. I love philosophy, but this is not you're conventional philosophy. You just taking a crazy sentence and trying to make it into a symbol. Doesn't make sense, I know. Here is an example. If it is not the case that If Richard won't Terry will, Kit won't. This magically means, (~(~R->T)->~X). SEE! Stupid! It turns out to be basically math. I will say that I was a bad student though, and fell behind. I missed a few lectures, and that screwed me. Since it is a lot like math, you can't afford to fall behind, and I fell behind. As a final warning, do not think I am stupid! I got a 4.0 last quarter, but if you suck at math, and are not a morning person, do not take this class. I just realized I evaluated the class, and not the professor, Levy is real cool. Funny too. But I had to drop the class, so this is sort of a conflicting statement.
Fall 2020 - I would take all the Bruinwalk reviews for this class with a grain of salt. I took this because A) reviews indicated it was easy-ish, and B) supposedly it was a good Law-prep class (Levy himself says it is)-- neither of which turned out to be true. This class is seriously difficult, demands a lot of studying time, and while Levy is a nice guy, he isn't awesome at explaining a lot of the concepts. Furthermore, it’s totally inapplicable to the LSAT (which has a much simpler, entirely different logic system). This class doesn't even ask you to evaluate or symbolize the logic of rhetorical arguments, is taught by an ex-computer scientist (and a lot of the TA's were math or comp-sci majors), so I'm not sure how this could be applicable to law as some have suggested. This class is basically math without numbers, and I'd assume if you're a stem major you could do well. In general however, I'd highly advise avoiding this class if you like philosophy for its conceptual content and analysis of phenomena-- this class is much closer to math than a social science. I assume the grade distribution for this class/reviews are heavily skewed based on a large number of drops (30 in my class after the first midterm, where roughly half the class got below a C), and a lot of people (I'd confidently say a third) taking the class P/NP. I did well mainly because Levy began grading the exams more leniently (I got an C- on the first midterm, then an B+ then an A- on the final) but I also had to study an absolutely a ridiculous amount of time to get an A-. Additionally the grading system (20% midterm 1 and 2, 40% final, and 20% HW) makes it difficult to get an A, especially given each exam is only 15 questions (so miss one or two, your grade drops significantly). So, while the content of the class is relatively interesting, I don't think its worth your time unless you're a Philosophy major (even in that case I'd consider avoiding it).
Spring 2019 - To clear up, this class is "Logic, Second Class," not phil of bio. For those who didn't take Prof. Levy's PHILOS 31, he is a very funny professor (and a super agreeable person! He agreed to give me PTE even though he didn't know who I was, but I eventually got in without a PTE), and use slides that's useful enough for self-review. The homework is much harder than 31, so going to discussion sessions and TA's office hours would be very helpful. My TA was Ian Boon, and he really knows his stuff, perhaps better than Prof. Levy. If you aced your homework, then you don't have to worry about the exams, which are definitely easier than homework, so be sure to really understand how to do your homework and you'll get an easy A.