Tony Martin is an excellent teacher.

Some here have said that he is a picky grader. In metalogic, I found just the opposite to be the case--he always gave students the benefit of the doubt, and never nitpicked about language. He also gave generous points for parts of proofs that were correct, even when steps were missing or mistaken. All in all, he's a surprisingly gentle grader.

As for effectiveness, I found him to be a very effective grader. If you talk to him in office hours, he'll give you lots of hints for the homework--probably more than he ought to. Many people who have trouble understanding his explanations have trouble because they haven't studied the course notes he provides, they haven't paid attention, or they haven't talked to him after class to clarify things they didn't understand at first. It is the sort of class that you have to work at and think about in order to do well in. And if you don't stay on top of things, you'll probably struggle. But don't blame Tony for your lack of diligence.

i second the previous reviewers opinion. i will not speculate as to martin's overall teaching ability, but this much is clear--he is not a philosophy professor.
he is completely ineffectual to i belive everyone but math majors. he is a brilliant man and that shows in the creativity of his proofs. he designed the language which we used in the class himself. when i came to explaining reasoning techniques and explanations of problems...forget about it. if you take the course fine a few friends and ask some of the grad students for help because even though martin has commendible intents (hes always in his office willing to talk) hes no help.

Boy o boy... this guy..

Start it off with he is a really good guy. Hes nice, he will explain things again if asked, always around, helpful in office hours and really does try to help. In spite of this, he often times fell short of sufficient help.

I dont consider this class a philosophy class. Its all math proof based, some deduction, tautology stuff like phil 31/32 but really the focus is on proofs and induction. This class is HARD!. By far the hardest philosophy class Ive taken, and worse is that its not very interesting, I'd advoid this class in general if I could do it over again.

His problem is not from being knowledgeable, its from the teaching aspect. He is a smart man no doubt, although he can't concisely transform his thoughts into words. He uses very convoluted and roundabout language to express his ideas, his proofs he writes on the board are cryptic, and he does not provide sufficient examples so when you're trying to do the hw, you're doing things you've never seen before.

Although he is around so take advantage of OH. He is a very picky grader. You have to prove things in exactly the language that he wants or else he slashes off points. He does not give you a lot of freedom in deducing.

Grading: HWs are always pretty short, half were really easy, 1/4 hard and 1/4 impossible.
Midterm, totally fair.
Final take home and also fair, but very hard.

He adds in humor with his teaching that is funny and interesting, however, he just cant teach, advoid him and 135!