I am an individual who enjoys independently studying mathematics, who has developed a decent degree of mathematical maturity by means of doing so over the years.
At the moment, I am particularly interested in foundations (logic and set theory, mostly). I use several ‘standard’ treatments of the respective introductory material (e.g., Enderton, Van Dalen, Suppes), but have recently come across books of a somewhat different breed; for instance Fraenkel’s “Abstract Set Theory” and Robert Wolf’s “Tour through Mathematical Logic.”
I find the friendly exposition and “survey” nature of such books very illuminating of the subject matter as a whole, but can’t- for some reason- help but feeling guilty that I’m perhaps not spending the time on the more rigorous texts, such as those mentioned above.
I do feel more confident and aware of the approach and direction of the more standard treatment books after reading corresponding material in the books of latter style; my question to more experienced mathematicians: is this appreciably helping me as an investment in my time, or should I simply buckle down with the heavier resources and postpone ‘the big picture and how it all ties together’ until later?