Re: Question about the distinction between set and element

herschko_at_rutcor.rutgers.edu
Date: 07/10/04 

Date: 9 Jul 2004 22:35:57 -0700

Kerry Soileau wrote:
> It seems to go without saying that there is some intrinsic difference
> between the concepts of set and element.

Does it? Not to me.

> However, I wonder if this is not merely an illusion,

Indeed, an illusion. In set theory and most of mathematics (logic and
category theory being the primary excpetions), *everything* is a set.
x in y is a relationship between sets.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Question about the distinction between set and element
    ... >> It seems to go without saying that there is some intrinsic difference ... >> However, I wonder if this is not merely an illusion, ... be embedded in set theory. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: an important set theory post
    ... exception is the symbol for "is an element of" from set theory. ... But now you seem to be saying that 'is an element of' ... it refers to a relation. ... In such a first order context we don't refer to things that don't ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Is {} and element of all sets?
    ... The more nonsense you spout here, the harder it is to imagine why ... equivalent to Standard Set Theory. ... Saying A is a subset of B is the same as saying A union B = B. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Why? [was Re: Cantor`s powerset theorem is false?]
    ... I am not saying that one should ... make falsifiable claims to consistency. ... Set theory itself does not include a claim to consistency. ... an internally consistent system of mathematics that avoids uncountable ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Kuratowski Ordered Pair
    ... context is ordinary set theory, and the notion is precisely clear in ... textbook (which is better advice than my just giving the definition, ... kinds of other basic definitions are not known by him or her), ... x=y, contrary to the inane question, "Are you saying that its, ...
    (sci.math)
Quantcast