1

How would we define a set that contains itself within a knowledge ontology?

I am thinking that set membership would probably inherit from a generic base class of total containment from which both physical containment and conceptual containment are derived.

  • total containment
    • physical containment
    • conceptual containment
      • set containment
nbro
  • 39,006
  • 12
  • 98
  • 176
polcott
  • 111
  • 3
  • Hi Polcott! Your question isn't completely clear to me. You say "I am thinking that set membership would probably inherit from a generic base class of total containment", but then you show that "set containment" (which I think is a synonym for "set membership") derives from "conceptual containment". Can you clarify this? Furthermore, have a look at [Russel's paradox](https://math.stackexchange.com/q/253818/168764), which is at least remotely related to this question. – nbro Nov 24 '19 at 00:51
  • @nbro I am trying to piece together all humans concepts exactly how they already naturally fit together. I used the term [conceptual containment] as a more generic concept than [set containment]. [Members of a family] may be construed as an example of conceptual containment. – polcott Nov 24 '19 at 04:33

0 Answers0