Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- From: David C. Ullrich <dullrich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 07:44:02 -0500
On Thu, 1 May 2008 16:47:30 +0100, "Mark" <user@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
"[...]
[snip N/A stuff]
I don't see how a logical theory can be based on the undefined.
Then you haven't thought it through. It's obviously impossible
to define _everything_. Whatever the list of definitions is,
there is a first definition. And the terms in that definition
must be undefined, because there are no definitions yet at
that point.
David C. Ullrich
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- From: Julio Di Egidio
- Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- From: Mark
- Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- References:
- Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- From: Mark
- Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- From: Mark
- Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- From: Arturo Magidin
- Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- From: Mark
- Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- Prev by Date: Re: Algebraic questions
- Next by Date: Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- Previous by thread: Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- Next by thread: Re: Questioning the defintions of set and element.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|