From Russell's paradox to

Abstract
Russell’s way out of his paradox via the impredicative theory of types has roughly the same logical power as Zermelo set theory - which supplanted it as a far more flexible and workable axiomatic foundation for mathematics. We discuss some new formalisms that are conceptually close to Russell, yet simpler, and have the same logical power as higher set theory - as represented by the far more powerful Zermelo-Frankel set theory and beyond. END.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 11,412
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
James Levine (2001). On Russell's Vulnerability to Russell's Paradox. History and Philosophy of Logic 22 (4):207-231.
Kevin C. Klement, Russell-Myhill Paradox. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Kevin C. Klement, Russell's Paradox. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Nino Cocchiarella (2000). Russell's Paradox of the Totality of Propositions. Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 5 (1):25-37.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2010-12-22

Total downloads

17 ( #99,231 of 1,103,048 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

4 ( #84,821 of 1,103,048 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.