>>8841019>real analysis and proofs what doThis should be in the sticky. This question gets asked a few times a month.
First, do not listen to anyone telling you it is going to be hard because it is "real math"- those people are usually braindead notation wizards. You are really just going to be doing a lot of predicate logic. That is what they mean when they say "writing intensive". Real Analysis is mainly manipulating predicates of calculus, rather than actually finding numerical solutions to equations. The reason analysis is based on predicate logic is largely for historical reasons, i.e. European scholarship was largely interested in logic for most of the middle ages and that preference carried over into recent centuries. Also, a lot of pure mathematicians have a tic, where when they want something to be True(TM), they reach farther back in history for their methods and terminology. Over the past 100 years logic has largely gone out of fashion in American education, so when students encounter logic and quantifiers for the first time in university it appears difficult, foreign, esoteric even. It isn't. Practice forming sentences with the different combinations of the terms "all", "some", and "not" and you'll be fine. Don't fall for the "Notation is Truth(TM)" meme.
You also shouldn't have trouble finding lecture notes on predicate logic. I just pulled up a few dozen in a couple seconds from google using a site:.edu filter. Here's an example of some notes from oregon state with a sensible approach to explaining the motivation for predicates.
https://web.engr.oregonstate.edu/~afern/classes/cs532/notes/fo-ss.pdfGenerally "discrete mathematics" courses have better explanations of predicate logic than philosophy courses. Not every explanation of predicate logic will be sensible, however, so cast a wide net, and then once you have plenty of options choose carefully. Good luck.
