Date: Apr 4, 2013 5:47 PM
Author: fom
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224

On 4/4/2013 4:10 PM, Virgil wrote:
> In article
> <>,
> WM <> wrote:

>>> No, a collection is no more and no less than "all its elements".
>> But an inductive set contains elements that are not subject to
>> induction?

> Only in Wolkenmuekenheim!

Check the definitions.

The intersection of the class of all inductive sets
containing the empty set is the inductive set for
which every element has a finite chain of predecessors
initiated with the empty set.

But, unlike WM, you are working from your stated definition
which corresponds with a statement of the Dedekind-Peano
axioms. I let myself get confused by all of this switching
back and forth between "obvious" unstated theories.