As I understand the ZFC solution to Russell's paradox, since {x|x[itex]\notin[/itex]x} must be {x|x[itex]\notin[/itex]x}[itex]\cap[/itex]S for some set S, the paradox goes away, but in Morse-Kelley, if I understand Class Comprehension correctly, although again there must be some M such that {x|x[itex]\notin[/itex]x}[itex]\cap[/itex]M, this M may be a proper class, which no longer is as limiting as the ZFC version, and hence no longer gives the same solution. So either I am going wrong somewhere, or MK solves Russell's Paradox in a different way. I would be grateful for enlightenment. Thanks.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Morse-Kelley Class Comprehension axiom and Russell's paradox

Loading...

Similar Threads - Morse Kelley Class | Date |
---|---|

A Testing Fit in Latent Class Analysis | Jul 17, 2017 |

Are calc-based stats classes useful for decision making? | Sep 11, 2015 |

Communicating Classes in Markov Chains | Nov 5, 2014 |

Equivalence classes of proper classes | Jul 15, 2014 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**