 Welcome guest
You're not logged in.
281 users online, thereof 0 logged in

In the historical development of set theory, it was mentioned that Russel demonstrated, the following classical definition is not sufficient since it leads to paradoxical constructs. If you are a beginning student of the set theory, the classical definition of Cantor is a good starting point, because it is highly intuitive.

## Definition: Set, Set Element, Empty Set (Cantor)

(Original, naive set definition of Cantor (1895))1

A set is a combination of well-distinguishable, mathematical objects. Let $$X$$ be a set.

• If an object $$x$$ belongs to the set $$X$$, it is called ist element and written as $$x\in X$$.
• We write $$x\notin X$$, if $$x$$ is not an element of the set $$X$$.
• If $X$ has no elements, we call $X$ empty, and write $X=\emptyset,$ otherwise non-empty and write $X\neq\emptyset.$

1 Nowadays, we use the Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms (ZFA) to define sets.

## 1.Explanation: Possibilities to Describe Sets, Venn-Diagrams, List, and Set-Builder Notations

(none)

### Bibliography (further reading)

 Hoffmann, Dirk W.: “Grenzen der Mathematik – Eine Reise durch die Kerngebiete der mathematischen Logik”, Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, 2011

 Kohar, Richard: “Basic Discrete Mathematics, Logic, Set Theory & Probability”, World Scientific, 2016