Re: Resolving the paradoxes of set theory

From: Robert Low (mtx014_at_linux.services.coventry.ac.uk)
Date: 10/28/04 

Date: 28 Oct 2004 12:50:55 GMT

Torkel Franzen <torkel@sm.luth.se> wrote:
>mtx014@linux.services.coventry.ac.uk (Robert Low) writes:
>> Fair enough. Since I never used the notion, I see no reason for
>> me to try to defend it: I'll leave it to the OP to do that.
> OK, so your response to the question whether the set of all sets
>"defined according to the axioms of ZF" exists had no bearing on
>this question.

You're being picky: OK, this is sci.logic, so you probably
feel morally obliged to be picky, even if it isn't required.
I simply read what he wrote as being a clumsy attempt to
express the question of why the universe in a model of
ZF isn't a set. And I think I gave an appropriate response
to that. 

-- 
Rob.  http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
Quantcast