[FOM] About Paradox Theory

[Rob Arthan]

On 17 Sep 2011, at 16:05, hdeutsch at ilstu.edu wrote:

> 
> Here is the argument concerning the "paradox of grounded classes" to save people from having to look it up:
> 
> The following argument is first-order valid:
> 
> AyEzAx(F(xz) <--> x=y).  Therefore,
> 
> -EwAx(F(xw) <--> Au([F(xu) --> Ey(F(yu) & -Ez{F(zu) & F(zy)])]).

I think something has gone missing in your transcription here: AyEzAx(F(xz) <--> x=y) is not true for every interpretation of F (e.g., if F is identically false).

Regards,

Rob.