我不知道为什么把这本书放在“国外经典哲学教材译丛——中国人民大学出版社”，不知道“经典”二字该做何理解。到底是它属于“古典”的行列，就像柏拉图一样，以前的东西；还是说只要看了它别的同类书都不用看了？如果是前一种理解的话，倒是能说通一点，请看Copi著作表： 1969 (1953). Introduction to Logic. Macmillan. 1954. Symbolic Logic. Macmillan. 1965 (edited with Paul Hente). Language, Thought and Culture. The University of Michigan Press. 1966 (edited with Robert Beard). Essays on Wittgenstein's Tractatus. 1967 (edited with James Gould). Contemporary Readings in Logical Theory. Macmillan. 1971. The theory of logical types. Routledge and Kegan Paul. 1986 (with Keith Burgess-Jackson). Informal Logic. Macmillan.
Similar statements [逻辑是研究思维或思维的结果的] are found in virtually all logic textbooks of that period. After 1900, however, changes are beginning to occur, slowly at first but then, especially after the 1920s, much faster, until the nineteenth-century view of logic fades away entirely during the 1960s, with Copi as one rare late representative. （Pieter A. M. Seuren, The Logic of Language, 2010, 5页）
I do not recommend this book as a text for those attempting to learn logic today. The symbolic language that is used and the mode of problem-solving demonstrated by Copi in this work is long since outdated and using this text will only confuse a logic amateur when they move on to more current and complicated logic.