• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.163-196
• /
• 2017

Wittgenstein declares in the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus that he resolved Russell's Paradox. According to him, a function cannot be its own argument. If we assume that a function F(fx) can be its own argument, a proposition "F(F(fx))" will be given, where the outer function F has a meaning different from the inner function F. In consequence, "F(F(fx))" will not be able to have a definite sense. Why, however, does Wittgenstein call into question a function F(fx) and "F(F(fx))"? To answer this question, we must examine closely Russell's own resolution of Russell's Paradox. Only when we can understand Russell's resolution can we do Wittgenstein's resolution. In particular, I will endeavor to show that the idea in Wittgenstein's 1913 letter to Russell provides a decisive clue for this problem.

• Journal for History of Mathematics
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.30-42
• /
• 1996

최근 <수학기초론>이란 용어는 Burali-Forti paradox 이후 족(class)과 집합(set) 개념을 이해하려는 시도에서 출발한 20세기적 문제에 적용되고 있다. 이 글에서는 그 해결책으로 제시된 주의ㆍ주장 중 논리적인 모순을 해결하기 위한 Russel의 논리주의적 공리론에 바탕을 두고 살펴보려고 한다. 제 2장에서는 무한의 심연 속에 웅크리고 있는 집합론에서의 역설과 발생 원인에 대하여 살펴보았다. 제 3장에서는 공리론적 집합론 중에서 러셀의 유형론과 그것을 단순화시킨 현대의 유형론을 살펴보고, ZF 집합론과 ZF 집합론의 연장인 처치 집합론의 기본 공리를 살펴보았다.

• Journal of Physiology & Pathology in Korean Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.583-590
• /
• 2007

The significance of Han medicine (韓醫學), the Korean traditional medicine, that has lasted throughout the past couple millenniums relies upon Han Philosophy distinguished by its uniqueness. In brief, the specificity of Han medicine is characterized by unity of spirit and body, part and whole. According to this theory, when curing a frozen shoulder, it is usually cured by acupuncturing the area around the part that aches, but also doing so on the area that is totally different from the aching part such as the opposite part of the body. In fact, this can be pursued only through aspects that enable one to realize the unity of part and whole, and a ground for this possibility bases upon the crux of Eastern Philosophy, I-ching(역), such as theory of Five Elements (음양오행) and Three Pillars(삼재). In Western set theory, the issues of Class(부류) and elements(요원), whole and part were independently discussed in the area of mereology, and the question of part and whole was encountered with aporia and paradox since Greek ancient philosophy. At the turn of this century, many philosophers endeavored to pursue academic inquiry to resolve this paradox, especially by Russell and Whitehead through ${\ll}$Principia Mathematica${\gg}$ at the beginning of this century. in the process, there came out a phrase 'Russell's Paradox'. Russell himself proposed a typological resolution as an answer to the inquiry. However, 'Russell's Paradox' still remains as an aporia even till present days. During medieval period, this inquiry was even considered as 'insolubia'. Throughout this paper, 1 attempt to provide an analytic aspect on 'Russell's Paradox' from an unique thinking method and perspective of Han medicine that embodies the concept of 'unity of part and whole'. To do so, 1 suggest a physiological model in the first place depicted by diagrams of Circle 원, Quadrangle 방, Triangle 각(CQT) that portray the logic of Hado or Hotu 하도 which is 'the pattern from the river Ho'. That is to suggest that CQT원방각 of Hado can De a logical foundation that explains the notions of spirit (정신,뇌), internal organs(장부), and meridian system which functions as a solution to the question of 'Russell's Paradox'. There are precedent academic works examining the issue from philosophical aspect such as Sangil Kim's ${\ulcorner}$Han medicine과 러셀역설 해의${\lrcorner}$ Han Medicine and Resolution of Russell's Paradox(2005), and this analysis will further attempt to critically examine such works from a perspective of Han medicine.