Russell Standish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> From the dim recesses of my memory, "the set of all sets" is a
> logical contradiction, although I can't remember why. Is the
> plenitude like the "set of all sets" in some way?

I think you remember "the set of all set that are not members of
themselves"  Call it S.

Is S a member of itself?

Reply via email to