I realize that Russell's Paradox in naive set theory is considered to be, well... a paradoxical fallacy. Despite the fact that it is paradoxical and goes against logical intuition, is it really illogical though? It seems to me that the method in which the paradox arises is perfectly sound and as a result, the paradox should be taken as an inherent aspect of logic, instead of being shunned and 'renormalized' as it was in axiomatic ZF set theory.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

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

# Russel's Paradox in Naive Set Theory

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**