[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Historical footnote

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:47:07 -0500
Message-id: <45D39F7B.20300@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Chris,    (01)

My comment was based on the folklore, but that point
strengthens my claim that Russell hadn't discovered
anything new:    (02)

CM> Cantor in fact already had a firm (if informal) grasp
 > of the modern set/class distinction that prevented him
 > from seeing any paradoxes in his set theory.    (03)

JFS>> Zermelo noted Cantor's remarks and had already developed
 >> the first version of his axioms to avoid the paradox before
 >> he had heard anything from Russell.    (04)

CM> That is not so.  Zermelo's first axiomatization was in 1908
 > and was expressly in response to Russell's paradox, among others.    (05)

That was his first published version.  I based my remark on the
following statement by Putnam:    (06)

    Zermelo even denied that his set-theoretic work depended on
    Whitehead and Russell; he claimed to have been aware of the
    "Russell paradox" on his own.    (07)

That's from http://www.jfsowa.com/peirce/putnam.htm    (08)

John    (09)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (010)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>