I am currently reading Tao's Analysis I, specifically, the section about set theory and I got stuck with one exercise which consists of deducing some basic axioms of set theory assuming the axiom of universal specification.
Axiom (Universal Specification) Suppose for every object $x$ we have a property $P(x)$ pertaining to $x$ (so that for every $x$, $P(x)$ is either a true statement or a false statement.) Then there exists a set $\{x : P(x) \text{is true}\}$ such that for every object $y$, $$y \in \{x : P(x) \text{is true}\} \text{if and only if} \space P(y) \space \text{is true}$$
The exercise consists of deducing the following axioms from the universal specification:
Axiom 1
There exists a set $\emptyset$, known as the empty set, which contains no elements, i.e., for every object $x$ we have $x \not \in \emptyset$.
Axiom 2 If $a$ is an object, then there exists a set $\{a\}$ whose only element is $a$. Furthermore, if $a$ and $b$ are objects, then there exists a set $\{a,b\}$ whose only elements are $a$ and $b$.
Axiom 3 (Pairwise union)
Given any two sets $A,B$ there exists a set $A \cup B$, called the union $A \cup B$ of $A$ and $B$, whose elements consists of all elements which belong to $A$ or $B$ or both.
Axiom 4 (axiom of specification)
Let $A$ be a set, and for each $x \in A$, let $P(x)$ be a property pertaining to $x$. Then there exists a set, called $\{x \in A: P(x) \text{is true}\}$ whose elements are precisely the elements $x$ in $A$ for which $P(x)$ is true.
First of all I am having some difficulty understanding the universal specification axiom, isn't exactly by definition of the set $\{x : P(x) \text{is true}\}$ that $y$ is in this set if and only if $P(y)$ is true? So, why do we need an axiom to be able to say this?
So, now suppose we take the universal specification as an axiom, then 4 it's immediate since $\{x \in A: P(x) \text{is true}\}=A \cap \{x \in A: P(x) \text{is true}\}$.
I don't see how can I show the remaining three axioms assuming universal specification, any hints that could suggest me how should I prove the implications would be greatly appreciated.