Naïve Set Theory - Part 1: Construction of Sets 2021-02-28T11:57:36.220Z


Comment by Sai Sasank Y (sai-sasank-y) on "You and Your Research" – Hamming Watch/Discuss Party · 2021-03-19T13:17:01.184Z · LW · GW

This one on YT: Hamming, "You and Your Research" (June 6, 1995) - YouTube

Comment by Sai Sasank Y (sai-sasank-y) on Naïve Set Theory - Part 1: Construction of Sets · 2021-03-04T14:08:55.170Z · LW · GW

From what I understand, such predicates seem to be causing trouble. For example, the result that no set contains everything seems like too strong a result at this point.

From the book: "To specify a set, it is not enough to pronounce some magic words; it is also necessary to have at hand a set to whose elements the magic words apply". Magic words basically mean the predicates S(x).

The book says such x's don't constitute a set and calls them illegal. It also mentions that class is the word to describe such x's and that classes are irrelevant in its approach to set theory. 

Perhaps when I read further I'd be able to reason better.

Comment by Sai Sasank Y (sai-sasank-y) on The LessWrong 2018 Book is Available for Pre-order · 2020-12-11T16:14:11.614Z · LW · GW

Will this book be available to purchase in India when it's out on Amazon? Will I be required to order on the international site? ( Thank you :)