> A set is a collection of entities, either by enumeration or in accordance
> with some rule or definition. It is a deliberate selection.

> Take the universe as a whole, or even a "universe of discourse". Can
> there be a set which embraces the whole, or must any set be a selection from
> within?

> Likewise, can there be a null set, or is this impossible if no choice has
> been made.

> A set is a collection of entities, either by enumeration or in accordance
> with some rule or definition.  It is a deliberate selection.
>   Take the universe as a whole, or even a "universe of discourse".  Can
> there be a set which embraces the whole, or must any set be a selection from
> within?
>    Likewise, can there be a null set, or is this impossible if no choice has
> been made.
>    The absence of a universal, or null, set, doesn't rule out the existence
> of a full set (all entities present), or an empty set (all entities absent).
> (2)  Are Venn Diagrams an advance on Euler's Circles?
> (3)  Is Russell's Paradox due to failure to distinguish between abstract and
> concrete nouns, and that any set always applies to...

> Don H wrote:

>> A set is a collection of entities, either by enumeration or in accordance
>> with some rule or definition.  It is a deliberate selection.

>
> The selection must be significant. For example a set of four trees isn't
> a set, but four trees. Also, a 'collection' can be vague if it is not
> identified as a particular. A set of flowers (if we allow it) could be a
> flower in each continent, or a bouquet. The idea of collection does not
> do justice to the possibilities.
>

>>   Take the universe as a whole, or even a "universe of discourse".  Can
>> there be a set which embraces the whole, or must any set be a selection from
>> within?

>
> The term 'whole' is ambiguous. It can refer to the sum of objects, or to
> an emergent property arising from the object sum but not determined by
> that sum, or it can be the manifesting condition of the objects. A 'set'
> is a vague enough term to ignore the differences. The consequences of
> that are decisive. ...

> Don H wrote:

>> A set is a collection of entities, either by enumeration or in accordance
>> with some rule or definition.  It is a deliberate selection.

>
> The selection must be significant. For example a set of four trees isn't
> a set, but four trees. Also, a 'collection' can be vague if it is not
> identified as a particular. A set of flowers (if we allow it) could be a
> flower in each continent, or a bouquet. The idea of collection does not
> do justice to the possibilities.
>

>>   Take the universe as a whole, or even a "universe of discourse".  Can
>> there be a set which embraces the whole, or must any set be a selection from
>> within?

>
> The term 'whole' is ambiguous. It can refer to the sum of objects, or to
> an emergent property arising from the object sum but not determined by
> that sum, or it can be the manifesting condition of the objects. A 'set'
> is a vague enough term to ignore the differences. The consequences of
> that are decisive. ...

> Don H wrote:

>> A set is a collection of entities, either by enumeration or in

>> with some rule or definition. It is a deliberate selection.

>
> The selection must be significant. For example a set of four trees isn't
> a set, but four trees. Also, a 'collection' can be vague if it is not
> identified as a particular. A set of flowers (if we allow it) could be a
> flower in each continent, or a bouquet. The idea of collection does not
> do justice to the possibilities.
>

>> Take the universe as a whole, or even a "universe of discourse". Can
>> there be a set which embraces the whole, or must any set be a selection

>> within?

>
> The term 'whole' is ambiguous. It can refer to the sum of objects, or to
> an emergent property arising from the object sum but not determined by ...

> On Apr 21, 2:43 pm, J Jones aol.com> wrote:

>> Don H wrote:

>>> A set is a collection of entities, either by enumeration or in accordance
>>> with some rule or definition. It is a deliberate selection.

>> The selection must be significant. For example a set of four trees isn't
>> a set, but four trees. Also, a 'collection' can be vague if it is not
>> identified as a particular. A set of flowers (if we allow it) could be a
>> flower in each continent, or a bouquet. The idea of collection does not
>> do justice to the possibilities.
>>

>>> Take the universe as a whole, or even a "universe of discourse". Can
>>> there be a set which embraces the whole, or must any set be a selection from
>>> within?

>> The term 'whole' is ambiguous. It can refer to the sum of objects, or to
>> an emergent property arising from the object sum but not determined by
>> that sum, or it can be the manifesting condition of the objects. A 'set'
>> is a vague enough term to ignore the differences. The consequences of
>> that are decisive.
>> ...

> "J Jones" aol.com> wrote in message
> news:fuj1q5$bf4$1@aioe.org...

>> Don H wrote:

>>> A set is a collection of entities, either by enumeration or in

> accordance

>>> with some rule or definition. It is a deliberate selection.

>> The selection must be significant. For example a set of four trees isn't
>> a set, but four trees. Also, a 'collection' can be vague if it is not
>> identified as a particular. A set of flowers (if we allow it) could be a
>> flower in each continent, or a bouquet. The idea of collection does not
>> do justice to the possibilities.
>>

>>> Take the universe as a whole, or even a "universe of discourse". Can
>>> there be a set which embraces the whole, or must any set be a selection

> from

>>> within?

>> The term 'whole' is ambiguous. It can refer to the sum of objects, or to
>> an emergent property arising from the object sum but not determined by
>> that sum, or it can be the manifesting condition of the objects. A 'set' ...

> On Apr 22, 6:28 am, "Don H" bigpond.com> wrote:

>> A set is a collection of entities, either by enumeration or in accordance
>> with some rule or definition. It is a deliberate selection.
>> Take the universe as a whole, or even a "universe of discourse". Can
>> there be a set which embraces the whole, or must any set be a selection from
>> within?
>> Likewise, can there be a null set, or is this impossible if no choice has
>> been made.
>> The absence of a universal, or null, set, doesn't rule out the existence
>> of a full set (all entities present), or an empty set (all entities absent).
>> (2) Are Venn Diagrams an advance on Euler's Circles?
>> (3) Is Russell's Paradox due to failure to distinguish between abstract and
>> concrete nouns, and that any set always applies to something other than
>> itself? You can have a Set of sets, but the Set cannot be a member.

>
> This is a classic struggle between mans attempted view of the
> universe, and his 'instinctive sense' of completion of self.
>
> You inadvertantly 'hit the nail oin the head' when you wrote "must any ...

> A set is a collection of entities, either by enumeration or in
> accordance with some rule or definition. It is a deliberate selection.
> Take the universe as a whole, or even a "universe of discourse". Can
> there be a set which embraces the whole, or must any set be a selection
> from within?