# Re: The seven step-Mathematical preliminaries

```
On Jun 4, 2009, at 8:27 AM, Torgny Tholerus wrote:
> How do you handle the Russell paradox with the set of all sets that
> does
> not contain itself?  Does that set contain itself or not?
>
> My answer is that that set does not contain itself, because no set can
> contain itself.  So the set of all sets that does not contain
> itself, is
> the same as the set of all sets.  And that set does not contain
> itself.
> This set is a set, but it does not contain itself.  It is exactly the
> same with the natural numbers, BIGGEST+1 is a natural number, but it
> does not belong to the set of all natural numbers.  The set of all
> sets
> is a set, but it does not belong to the set of all sets.```
```
So you're saying that the set of all sets doesn't contain all sets.
trying to avoid?

-- Kory

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

```