Re: Is a set object exhaustive?

On Oct 29, 3:51 pm, LauLuna <laureanol...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 28, 12:29 am, John Jones <jonescard...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Can anyone give me a list of thing(s) that cannot be in a set and,
also, say why they cannot be in a set?

A sound, a headache, and any other object of external or internal
senses. Because sets are are 'intelligible', not 'sensible' objects,
in the knowledge-theoretic sense of the terms.

Regards

Sorry, I misread John Jones's question. I read: 'thing(s) that cannot
be a set' instead of 'thing(s) that cannot be in a set'.

Regards

.