[isabelle] A tautological error?
the Russel's Paradox constitutes a surprise:
Doesn't it ignore the Subject-Object-Relation of all statement?No
definition might define it's own definition. As someone upheld a
recursive function here: Any recursive function must be defined before
calling it, the recursion is no defining-process, it comes afterwards.
Kind of a tautological error?
As far as Cantor is the guilty, well, Russell should have rejected
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail (Mailman edition) and