| This is a file in the archives of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. |
Extensionality:This axiom asserts that when sets x and y have the same members, they are the same set.
x
y[
z(z
x
z
y)
x=y]
The next axiom asserts the existence of the empty set:
Null Set:Since it is provable from this axiom and the previous axiom that there is a unique such set, we may introduce the notation Ø to denote it.
x
y(y
x)
The next axiom asserts that if given any set x and y, there exists a pair set of x and y, i.e., a set which has only x and y as members:
Pairs:Since it is provable that there is a unique pair set for each given x and y, we introduce the notation {x,y} to denote it.
x
y
z
w(w
z
w=x
w=y)
The next axiom asserts that for any given set x, there is a set y which has as members all of the members of all of the members of x:
Unions:Since it is provable that there is a unique union of any set x, we introduce the notation
x
y
z[z
y
![]()
w(w
x & z
w)]
x to denote it.
The next axiom asserts that for any set x, there is a set y which contains as members all those sets whose members are also elements of x, i.e., y contains all of the subsets of x:
Power Set:Since every set provably has a unique `power set', we introduce the notation
x
y
z[z
y
![]()
w(w
z
w
x)]
(x) to denote it.
Note also that we may define the notion x is a subset of y
(x
y) as:
z(z
x
z
y).
Then we may simplify the statement of the Power Set Axiom as
follows:
x
y
z[z
y
z
x)
The next axiom asserts the existence of an infinite set, i.e., a set with an infinite number of members:
Infinity:We may think of this as follows. Let us define the union of x and y (x
x[Ø
x &
y(y
x
![]()
{y,{y}}
x)]
y) as the
union of the pair set of x and y, i.e., as
{x,y}. Then the Axiom of Infinity
asserts that there is a set x which contains Ø as a
member and which is such that, anytime y is a member of
x, then y
{y} is a member
of x. Consequently, this axiom guarantees the existence of a
set of the following form:
{Ø, {Ø}, {Ø, {Ø}}, {Ø, {Ø}, {Ø, {Ø}}}, }Notice that the second element, {Ø}, is in this set because (1) the fact that Ø is in the set implies that Ø
{Ø} is in the set and (2) Ø
{Ø} just is {Ø}. Similarly, the third
element, {Ø, {Ø}}, is in this set because (1) the fact
that {Ø} is in the set implies that {Ø}
{{Ø}} is in the set and (2) {Ø}
{{Ø}} just is {Ø, {Ø}}. And so
forth.
The next axiom asserts that every set is well-founded:
Regularity:A member y of a set x with this property is called a minimal element. This axiom rules out the existence of circular chains of sets (e.g., such as x
x[x
Ø
![]()
y(y
x &
z(z
x
z
y))]
y &
y
z & and
z
x) as well as infinitely
descending chains of sets (such as
x3
x2
x1
x0).
The final axiom of ZF is the Replacement Schema. Suppose that
(x,y,
) is a
formula with x and y free, and which may or may not
have free variables
z1,
,zk. Furthermore,
let
x,y,
[s,r,
]
be the result of substituting s and r for
x and y, respectively, in
(x,y,
). The
every instance of the following schema is an axiom:
Replacement Schema:In other words, if we know that
z1
zk[
x
!y
(x,y,
)
![]()
u
v
r(r
v
![]()
s(s
u &
x,y,
[s,r,
]))]
is a functional
formula (which relates each set x to a unique set y),
then if we are given a set u, we can form a new set
v as follows: collect all of the sets to which the members
of u are uniquely related by
.
Note that the Replacement Schema can take you out of the set
u when forming the set v. The elements of
v need not be elements of u. By contrast,
the well-known Separation Schema of Zermelo yields
new sets consisting only of those elements of a given set u
which satisfy a certain condition
. That is, suppose that
(x,
) has
x free and may or may not have
z1,
,zk free.
Then the Separation Schema asserts:
Separation SchemaIn other words, if given a formulaz1
zk[
u
v
r(r
v
r
u &
x,
[r,
])]
and a set u,
there exists a set v which has as members precisely the members
of u which satisfy the formula
.
First published: July 11, 2002
Content last modified: July 11, 2002