Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I've already found some similar questions in here (and other sites), but in most of the case, the use of axiom of foundation is required to complete the proof. Is there any way to prove $\not\exists x(x\in x)$, without using the axiom?

Thank you in advance.

share|cite|improve this question
See this comment. – Git Gud Apr 20 '14 at 12:44
Here are some lecture notes by Aczel on non-well-founded set theory. – MJD Apr 20 '14 at 13:04
The set of sets with more than one element contains itself... Right? – BlackBear Apr 20 '14 at 19:07
@BlackBear In ZF set theory, there is no such set. If Morse-Kelley set theory, there is a class of all sets with more than one element, but this class is provably not a set. I think the situation in NFU set theory is similar to MK. – MJD Apr 29 '14 at 13:30
up vote 12 down vote accepted

You can't.

It is consistent that the axiom of foundation fails, and there are sets of the form $x=\{x\}$. More generally there are "Anti-Foundation Axioms" which assert the existence of ill-founded sets. The more famous ones are by Boffa and by Azcel.

share|cite|improve this answer
Uh, where exactly? – Asaf Karagila Apr 20 '14 at 12:49
Nevermind, I was parsing it wrongly. – Git Gud Apr 20 '14 at 12:50
Okay then. Because I've been up an ungodly number of hours, and it's very feasible that I made a typo. – Asaf Karagila Apr 20 '14 at 12:52

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.