Generally, if we intepret our mind consciousness according to our notionally necessary occasion dragging feality, usually we need only duality abiding thinking and judging daily habit.

Because society by itself usually at ordinary liberal activity and economic commerce and trading is at principle executed countries, each work site and that place abiding own communication with words are ordinarily used for class society and that questioning and answering must be dependent on only yes or no.

That the most commonplace spread idea depends on that one given propositional logic, we usually only dual answering order with yes or no, toward one proposition, only affirmative reaction or negtive it could be done at any our concrete communication site in daily life at any occasion.

Nevertheless, we have anytime another mind, except publicly answering for the time being, and if that conversasion is just mutually small talk, we anytime implicitly secretly another true mind and publicly answering procedural answer.

Though, at some interporetable our true mind, consistently three ideas are readied for in our personal mind, you know.

By the way, philosopher and mathematician otherwise peace activists and thinker Bartland Russell is generally famous at one of his submitting proposition around his name given paradox.

Just now, at twitter’s description, next formal presentation is given there.

_✹Formal Presentation

The term “naive set theory” is used in various ways. In one usage, naive set theory is a formal theory, which we may call NST, that is formulated in a first order language, with a binary non-logical predicate∈, and that includes the axiom of extentionality:

∀x∀y（∀z (z ∈ x ⇔ z∈y)⇒ x = y)

and the axiom schema of unrestricted comprehension

∃y∀x(x ∈y ∈ ⇔ γ(x))

for any formula γ with x the variable as a free variable inside γ. Suitable x
Then by existential instantiation (reusing the symbol y) and universal instantiation we have

y ∈ y ⇔ y ∉ y

a contradiction. Therefore, NST is inconsistent.

_

Upper logical mechanism is not so complecated.
Just Russell tries to indicate that one given proposition for anticulating set means each set’s belonging element( as simply set compsite members’ each mere unit, and necessarily that cognition deduces not belonging unit as not that set belonging element in indication, because one specified mentioning must make us that mentioned condition to fall under one indicated category contrarily indicates not fell under units in presumption.

That indication means not only duality abiding one given conditioned units as one belonging units(or a group) must indicate not that units in pair, nevertheless, in its mentioning, accidentally, otherwise unexpectedly we could be awoken to that unconsciously we are noticed with neither affirmated units nor negated units which accidentally are simultaneously indicated, that must be that elementally signified nature by itself and not that nature makes another for its analyzing or interpreting in specified procedural process, necessarily that setting awareness by itself, in other words, that presence necessarily is made in procedural intepretable mentioning by itself.
Though if mentioned set could be one given connotation, toward it, necessarily what connotation could not fall into must be negation to it as former connotation dragging one necessary outcome or the result.

But one another our awoken substance in ariticulating process is just that mentioned set by itself and only it could function as intermediation for mentioning or analyzing, that role given thing must be the third presence if we dare to analyze our mentioning consciousness, so intrindically.

And the third presence must indicate that our explicable consciousness has own mind as not our mind “content” but our mind “form”.

These upper explicable mechanism could be replaced with next formulation.

Our Consciousness makes one INDICABLE CONTENT=PROPOSITION(First), that must be COMPOSED SET.
Toward it, necessarily our First it makes another as DENIAL to One given Indicable Content as PROPOSITION(Second), that procedure necessarily outputting reality means “PROPOSITION and PROPOSITON NECESSARILY OUTPUTTING NEGATION in Explicable Procedure”.

Nevertheless, our mind’s conscious process does never stop there.
However, to these one set for the “set”, we’d get simultaneously the procedure that Our Consciousness makes another (Third)

That must be META-COGNITIVE (Third) Consciousness.
It is just OUR (Mind) SETTING “SET” By Itself, that remotely objectively regarded substance must be in our mind, so substantially.

Then, we could reach the “Own Triple Cognitive Mechanism” in mind.

And, in terms of mentioned procedural essence, that must be not only EQUIVALENT with SET’S ELEMENT(UNIT) but also (nevertheless simultaneously) DIFFERENT with it, as just EQIVOCAL or AMBIVALENT substantinal cognition.

And with these procedural mind attending consciousness’s presence must evidence that our mind itself necessarily has own Diverse Cognitions.
That is Meaning, Signifying, Defining and these negation in SET ARTICULATION.
Toward it, we synchronically have PROCRASTINATION, psychlogically, or mentally.

In other words, that PROCRASTINATION means our mind attending checking mechanism as introspectively recollective and objectively regarded meta-cogntion.

Though, necessarily Russell’s Paradox must indicate the essence of our mind concieving or conceivable some subconscously balancing instinctive INSPECTABLE MIND.

That must mean one of ZOOM IN and ZOOM BACK, otherwise FOCUS IN and FOCUS OUT, and the interpretation necessarily indicates that ZOOM IN or FOCUS IN means both
［First and Second in Pair］and［ (First and Second in Pair) and Third in Pair］

That must be DOUBLE REFRACTION STRUCTURE of “INCLUSION and EXTENSION”.

In other words, what Russell’s Paradox indicates us is OUR MIND has OWN REFRACTED STRYCTURE, and it necessarily means OUR MIND’s Own SUBJECTIVITY and OBJECTIVITY in Twisted Strucuture.

In other words,

OUR MIND’S Own Functon could be,

［First and Second in Pair］= ［ (First and Second in Pair) and Third in Pair］
And Logically only that equation is the sole mechanical another equation.

That is

Only Mind (of us) necessarily attending consciousness ［First and Second in Pair］= ［ (First and Second in Pair) and Third in Pair］means simultaneously AFFIRMATION is not only it but also NEGATION, only these procedure must mean OUR MIND.

In other words, probably machine itself could not calculate it, not without our indication, machine first could do this with our indication, but our mind is not that, in other words,
OUR MIND is ABLE to DO it in Judgement without INDICATED by ANOTHER IDENTIFIED PRESENCE.

And that laid difference must be ULTIMATE OUR HUMAN MIND’S ESSENCE.

(Irregularly to be continued)

Apr. 18th. 2022

Appendix; Next time, I’d like to output this time’s words’ narrating mechanism in mind process in replaced with equation.