The speculation above was intended as neutral on that, more investigatory about what would happen if you changed only \forall and \exists to use only the subtly calligraphic strokes in, say, +.

Actually there is, I was just tired and missed it. I’ve fixed the image.

and the double square brackets look funky. Gentzen is much nicer.

Thanks

Without seeing them in context, I still have a feeling that the weight on these is sufficient to make them complement Times

Yes, they are certainly better than the somewhat anemic default symbols.

I wonder what these would look like in Gentzen if you did them in the style of your other geometric symbols (pointed ends on the strokes, &c.).

I have been thinking about making two sets, one more geometric and the other more calligraphic. However, that would be a longer term goal; I do not think I will have enough time to do all that work before I need to deposit.

Wait. Is that the opposite of what I claimed before? I don’t remember.

If I understand you correctly, I think you are being consistent.

This does make a case for the geometric universal and existential quantifiers. Without seeing them in context, I still have a feeling that the weight on these is sufficient to make them complement Times (and not be as jarring as, say, Euler). The problem might be less about letter-like shapes being uncharacteristically geometric than simply about the density variation in the line of text. I wonder what these would look like in Gentzen if you did them in the style of your other geometric symbols (pointed ends on the strokes, &c.).

Wait. Is that the opposite of what I claimed before? I don’t remember.