Master of paradoxs

Master of eating.

Let S be the set of all sets that do not contain themselves. Tell my /lit/, does S contain itself or not?

>>8991943

First provide an example of a set that does not contain itself

Reading Orthofoxy right now. Its well written but Chesterton is so full of resentment its not even funny.

>>8991943
'Bertrand, please do stop breaking mathematics.' — Gottlob Frege, probably

>>8992025
The set {2} does not contain itself.

File: Chesterton.png (48KB, 1861x311px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1861x311px

>master of paradoxes

>>8992103
His fiction is generally better than the essays, which can get a bit didactic

>>8991285

Glad to finally see some Chesterton posts around here. You dudes should read "Heretics" and him crush some colons.

>>8992696
I had to read a portion of Heretic back in college, it was awesome.

>>8991285

>You heard the voice in the dark and you never heard it again.

The Man who was Thursday and The Ballad of the White Horse are his masterpieces. It's a shame that he fell in line with Catholic dogma and disowned Thursday later in life.

>>8991943
I never really got why this is a paradox: It assumes that you have to somehow be 'outside' of something to contain it. It's like asking if the universe contains itself.
Of course it does, you sod.

>>8992103
Yeah, my impression of Orthodoxy is sort of that he makes a lot of good points but he appeals to 'common sense' a lot more than seems sensible, if you get my meaning. He doesn't really pull punches with his disdain of some thinkers, and he uses a lot of flowery language. Writing's top-notch, but it really didn't convince me of anything I didn't already think.
>>8992145
I always viewed him like I do Roald Dahl: Like he was onto something but he never really caught up with it for sure. He's a really strong writer who makes a lot of good points and he has a lot of the eclectic tendencies of someone who lives life as if it were a storybook, but he's got a hint of the same sort of disconnect from reality Roald does (which is part of what made them both good writers). Maybe it's something to do with being British.
>>8992894
I just finished reading Thursday and I wanted to have him back to life so I could punch him in the face. It was exactly what I was expecting it to be, except that he made it look the other way around until the very end.

>>8991285
underrated desu

Tolkien vs Chesterton?

>>8992926
what a dumb ass
please stay away from everything that requires logic, for your own sake

>>8994881
They're on the same team my man

>>8995280
I don't care if I sound like a dumbass, it doesn't make any sense as a problem.
The question sounds like a guy looking for the location of the library reference by reading the reference itself: You already have the book, why are you asking?

>>8992134
>The set {2} does not contain itself.

Ok so a set is brackets { }

Or a set is object? 2

how does 2 not contain itself? it contains exactly itself

What does, 'containing itself' imply, what is an example of a set that contains itself?

>>8995369
of course S is a subset of S
the question is whether S is a member of S

>>8996547
the set of all sets would contain all sets, and is a set, and so would contain itself

see guys, thats the magic of G.K. Chesterton.

>>8992980
Right now I am at the part in Orthodoxy when he insults Marcus Aurelius and I can't seem to see any good arguments. The book is fill of petty insults and sophistry though.