See Russell's paradox in All languages combined, or Wiktionary
{
"etymology_templates": [
{
"args": {
"1": "mathematician",
"2": "logician",
"3": "philosopher",
"4": "",
"5": ""
},
"expansion": "mathematician, logician and philosopher",
"name": "named-after/list"
},
{
"args": {},
"expansion": "|",
"name": "!"
},
{
"args": {
"1": "en",
"2": "Bertrand Russell"
},
"expansion": "Bertrand Russell",
"name": "lang"
},
{
"args": {
"1": "en",
"2": "Bertrand Russell",
"nat": "English",
"occ": "mathematician",
"occ2": "logician",
"occ3": "philosopher",
"wplink": "="
},
"expansion": "Named after English mathematician, logician and philosopher Bertrand Russell",
"name": "named-after"
}
],
"etymology_text": "Named after English mathematician, logician and philosopher Bertrand Russell.",
"head_templates": [
{
"args": {
"1": "en",
"2": "noun",
"head": "Russell's paradox"
},
"expansion": "Russell's paradox",
"name": "head"
}
],
"lang": "English",
"lang_code": "en",
"pos": "name",
"senses": [
{
"categories": [
{
"kind": "other",
"name": "English entries with incorrect language header",
"parents": [
"Entries with incorrect language header",
"Entry maintenance"
],
"source": "w"
},
{
"kind": "other",
"name": "Entries with translation boxes",
"parents": [],
"source": "w"
},
{
"kind": "other",
"name": "Pages with 1 entry",
"parents": [],
"source": "w"
},
{
"kind": "other",
"name": "Pages with entries",
"parents": [],
"source": "w"
},
{
"kind": "other",
"name": "Terms with Finnish translations",
"parents": [],
"source": "w"
},
{
"kind": "other",
"name": "Terms with Icelandic translations",
"parents": [],
"source": "w"
},
{
"kind": "other",
"langcode": "en",
"name": "Paradoxes",
"orig": "en:Paradoxes",
"parents": [],
"source": "w"
},
{
"kind": "topical",
"langcode": "en",
"name": "Set theory",
"orig": "en:Set theory",
"parents": [
"Mathematics",
"Formal sciences",
"Sciences",
"All topics",
"Fundamental"
],
"source": "w"
}
],
"examples": [
{
"ref": "1999, R. C. Penner, Discrete Mathematics: Proof Techniques and Mathematical Structures, World Scientific, page 109:",
"text": "One concludes that there must be something fishy about the Axiom of Comprehension, and, over time, the replacement of the Axiom of Comprehension by the Schema of Separation was seen to resolve Russell's paradox. Indeed, one cannot apply the Schema of Separation as in Russell's paradox unless one knows in advance that the collection of all sets is itself a set.",
"type": "quote"
},
{
"ref": "2001, M. Randall Holmes, “Tarski's Theorem and NFU”, in C. Anthony Anderson, Michael Zelëny, editors, Logic, Meaning and Computation: Essays in Memory of Alonzo Church, Springer (Kluwer Academic), page 469:",
"text": "The well-known theorem of Tarski that truth of sentences in any reasonably expressive language L cannot be defined in the language L itself is proved by a diagonalization argument similar to the argument involved in Russell's paradox.[…]It is usual to think that Russell's paradox excludes \"large\" sets like the universe, but this is actually not the case. An alternate solution to Russell's paradox (and other paradoxes) was proposed by Quine (1937) in his system \"New Foundations\" (NF): comprehension restricted to stratified formulae.",
"type": "quote"
},
{
"text": "2013, Greg Frost-Arnold, Carnap, Tarski, and Quine at Harvard: Conversations on Logic, Mathematics, and Science, Carus Publishing Company (Open Court), page 43,\nRoughly, the idea is that Russell's paradox reveals that certain logics suffer serious problems, and therefore these logics should be avoided. […] Here again, Quine asserts that the real lesson of Russell's paradox is that we should give up quantifying over abstracta."
}
],
"glosses": [
"The paradox that a set defined to contain all sets which do not contain themselves can neither consistently contain itself nor not contain itself."
],
"id": "en-Russell's_paradox-en-name-jrh2TFcl",
"links": [
[
"set theory",
"set theory"
],
[
"paradox",
"paradox"
],
[
"set",
"set"
]
],
"raw_glosses": [
"(set theory) The paradox that a set defined to contain all sets which do not contain themselves can neither consistently contain itself nor not contain itself."
],
"related": [
{
"word": "barber paradox"
},
{
"word": "Burali-Forti paradox"
},
{
"word": "Grelling-Nelson paradox"
}
],
"synonyms": [
{
"sense": "paradox in set theory",
"word": "Russell's antinomy"
}
],
"topics": [
"mathematics",
"sciences",
"set-theory"
],
"translations": [
{
"code": "fi",
"lang": "Finnish",
"sense": "paradox in set theory",
"word": "Russellin paradoksi"
},
{
"code": "is",
"lang": "Icelandic",
"sense": "paradox in set theory",
"tags": [
"feminine"
],
"word": "Russell-þversögn"
}
],
"wikipedia": [
"Axiom schema of specification",
"Russell's paradox"
]
}
],
"word": "Russell's paradox"
}
{
"etymology_templates": [
{
"args": {
"1": "mathematician",
"2": "logician",
"3": "philosopher",
"4": "",
"5": ""
},
"expansion": "mathematician, logician and philosopher",
"name": "named-after/list"
},
{
"args": {},
"expansion": "|",
"name": "!"
},
{
"args": {
"1": "en",
"2": "Bertrand Russell"
},
"expansion": "Bertrand Russell",
"name": "lang"
},
{
"args": {
"1": "en",
"2": "Bertrand Russell",
"nat": "English",
"occ": "mathematician",
"occ2": "logician",
"occ3": "philosopher",
"wplink": "="
},
"expansion": "Named after English mathematician, logician and philosopher Bertrand Russell",
"name": "named-after"
}
],
"etymology_text": "Named after English mathematician, logician and philosopher Bertrand Russell.",
"head_templates": [
{
"args": {
"1": "en",
"2": "noun",
"head": "Russell's paradox"
},
"expansion": "Russell's paradox",
"name": "head"
}
],
"lang": "English",
"lang_code": "en",
"pos": "name",
"related": [
{
"word": "barber paradox"
},
{
"word": "Burali-Forti paradox"
},
{
"word": "Grelling-Nelson paradox"
}
],
"senses": [
{
"categories": [
"English entries with incorrect language header",
"English eponyms",
"English lemmas",
"English multiword terms",
"English nouns",
"English terms with quotations",
"Entries with translation boxes",
"Pages with 1 entry",
"Pages with entries",
"Terms with Finnish translations",
"Terms with Icelandic translations",
"en:Paradoxes",
"en:Set theory"
],
"examples": [
{
"ref": "1999, R. C. Penner, Discrete Mathematics: Proof Techniques and Mathematical Structures, World Scientific, page 109:",
"text": "One concludes that there must be something fishy about the Axiom of Comprehension, and, over time, the replacement of the Axiom of Comprehension by the Schema of Separation was seen to resolve Russell's paradox. Indeed, one cannot apply the Schema of Separation as in Russell's paradox unless one knows in advance that the collection of all sets is itself a set.",
"type": "quote"
},
{
"ref": "2001, M. Randall Holmes, “Tarski's Theorem and NFU”, in C. Anthony Anderson, Michael Zelëny, editors, Logic, Meaning and Computation: Essays in Memory of Alonzo Church, Springer (Kluwer Academic), page 469:",
"text": "The well-known theorem of Tarski that truth of sentences in any reasonably expressive language L cannot be defined in the language L itself is proved by a diagonalization argument similar to the argument involved in Russell's paradox.[…]It is usual to think that Russell's paradox excludes \"large\" sets like the universe, but this is actually not the case. An alternate solution to Russell's paradox (and other paradoxes) was proposed by Quine (1937) in his system \"New Foundations\" (NF): comprehension restricted to stratified formulae.",
"type": "quote"
},
{
"text": "2013, Greg Frost-Arnold, Carnap, Tarski, and Quine at Harvard: Conversations on Logic, Mathematics, and Science, Carus Publishing Company (Open Court), page 43,\nRoughly, the idea is that Russell's paradox reveals that certain logics suffer serious problems, and therefore these logics should be avoided. […] Here again, Quine asserts that the real lesson of Russell's paradox is that we should give up quantifying over abstracta."
}
],
"glosses": [
"The paradox that a set defined to contain all sets which do not contain themselves can neither consistently contain itself nor not contain itself."
],
"links": [
[
"set theory",
"set theory"
],
[
"paradox",
"paradox"
],
[
"set",
"set"
]
],
"raw_glosses": [
"(set theory) The paradox that a set defined to contain all sets which do not contain themselves can neither consistently contain itself nor not contain itself."
],
"topics": [
"mathematics",
"sciences",
"set-theory"
],
"wikipedia": [
"Axiom schema of specification",
"Russell's paradox"
]
}
],
"synonyms": [
{
"sense": "paradox in set theory",
"word": "Russell's antinomy"
}
],
"translations": [
{
"code": "fi",
"lang": "Finnish",
"sense": "paradox in set theory",
"word": "Russellin paradoksi"
},
{
"code": "is",
"lang": "Icelandic",
"sense": "paradox in set theory",
"tags": [
"feminine"
],
"word": "Russell-þversögn"
}
],
"word": "Russell's paradox"
}
Download raw JSONL data for Russell's paradox meaning in English (4.0kB)
This page is a part of the kaikki.org machine-readable English dictionary. This dictionary is based on structured data extracted on 2024-11-06 from the enwiktionary dump dated 2024-10-02 using wiktextract (fbeafe8 and 7f03c9b). The data shown on this site has been post-processed and various details (e.g., extra categories) removed, some information disambiguated, and additional data merged from other sources. See the raw data download page for the unprocessed wiktextract data.
If you use this data in academic research, please cite Tatu Ylonen: Wiktextract: Wiktionary as Machine-Readable Structured Data, Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), pp. 1317-1325, Marseille, 20-25 June 2022. Linking to the relevant page(s) under https://kaikki.org would also be greatly appreciated.