Is it preferred to look at intuitionistic logic as a special case of classical logic then branch from there since the two are largely similar aside from the results built on LEM, DNE and CP?
or, since intuitionistic logic is the "weaker" version, would it be safer to start with it?
my math background is that for engineering but pure logic wasn't a primary focus. What I know about pure logic is mostly due to self study (Kenneth Rosen's book on discrete mathematics was and still is a great introduction) but what my university curriculum was more interested in was enough to build and reduce logic circuits so, naturally, it wasn't interested in pure logic (they coincide but that's it).
edit: it would be better if suggested materials aren't the 'for X' type, as those are often tailored to suit the intended audience without going into the heart of the matter. this is just a personal opinion of mine but analogy-based approaches are flawed and incomplete. still, if you think that a certain 'for X' material is doing okay on that front, please go for it.
edit #2: i came across this book and it seems to build from ground up in a friendly way to non-classical logics. any thoughts about it?
