On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:36:47 +0100, you wrote: >How come the set of all sets doesn't exist?
In naive set theory, the existence of the set of all sets leads to a logical paradox. Specifically, the set of all sets would have to contain as a member the set of all sets that are not members of themselves. Look up "Russell's Paradox" in Wikipedia. Steve Schafer Fenestra Technologies Corp. http://www.fenestra.com/ _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe