Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In mathematical logic, Russell's paradox (also known as Russell's antinomy) is a set-theoretic paradox published by the British philosopher and mathematician, Bertrand Russell, in 1901. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] Russell's paradox shows that every set theory that contains an unrestricted comprehension principle leads to contradictions. [ 3 ]
The Principles of Mathematics (PoM) is a 1903 book by Bertrand Russell, in which the author presented his famous paradox and argued his thesis that mathematics and logic are identical. [ 1 ] The book presents a view of the foundations of mathematics and Meinongianism and has become a classic reference.
(Russell's popularization of his set theoretic paradox.) Not to be confused with the Barbershop paradox . Bhartrhari's paradox : The thesis that there are some things which are unnameable conflicts with the notion that something is named by calling it unnameable.
In fact, ZFC actually does circumvent Russell's paradox by restricting the comprehension axiom to already existing sets by the use of subset axioms. [25] Russell wrote (in Portraits from Memory, 1956) of his reaction to Gödel's 'Theorems of Undecidability': I wanted certainty in the kind of way in which people want religious faith.
The Principia Mathematica (often abbreviated PM) is a three-volume work on the foundations of mathematics written by the mathematician–philosophers Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell and published in 1910, 1912, and 1913.
Dutch edition book cover of Why I Am Not a Christian. Why I Am Not a Christian is an essay by the British philosopher Bertrand Russell.Originally a talk given on 6 March 1927 at Battersea Town Hall, under the auspices of the South London Branch of the National Secular Society, it was published that year as a pamphlet and has been republished several times in English and in translation.
Russell Brand has taken a step in his Christian faith by experiencing a sacrament of initiation. “Yesterday, I got baptized and it was an incredible, profound experience,” Brand, 48, wrote via ...
Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making empirically unfalsifiable claims, as opposed to shifting the burden of disproof to others. Russell specifically applied his analogy in the context of religion. [1]