Re: A

From: Jan Hidders <>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 11:22:43 GMT
Message-ID: <7y7Ae.141527$>

Paul wrote:
> Jan Hidders wrote:

>>>>In some sense you might say that is is "too large" to be a set. The
>>>>collection of all relations has the same problem. 
>>>I'm skeptical to this, but if it is too difficult to explain (or to
>>>give an example of a problem), I'll let it be for the moment.
>>I'll give another hint. Since unary relations are similar to sets you
>>can get Cantor's paradox. 

> Doesn't this only apply if you are considering the set of all relations
> over all domains? What if you restrict yourself to a finite set of
> domains? I can't see how Cantor's Paradox would apply in this case.

It wouldn't. But the question at hand was whether the collection of all relations can be a domain. If you are going to postualte the set of domains a priori, then the set of relations over those domains will of course not be one of those postulated domains.

  • Jan Hidders
Received on Sun Jul 10 2005 - 13:22:43 CEST

Original text of this message