Great review, the Collector is a fascinating read. The French Lieutenant's Woman is also a good read by John Fowles, I remember making a trip to Lyme Regis in Dorset after reading it.
Great review. I found this novel disturbingly gripping and extremely well-written. However, I found some of the backstory of the kidnapped woman was excessive in detail, which reduced the intensity of the novel and watered-down the tension.
A collection within a collection, a set within a set, an infinite regress, can't have a painting without a painter, does the barber shave himself? If he does, then he doesn't.
I thought I had a unique solution by answering that the barber was female. For those interested, the paradox is explained here: th-cam.com/video/lK5dWZZMfeo/w-d-xo.html
Lol....females shave, but I won't go into details about where they shave. That video you posted is helpful, but there's more to the story. Obviously, we are not specifically concerned about a barber, we are concerned with Set Theory. Russell showed that the old theory, known as Naive Theory, could no longer be used; a new theory was needed. Ernst Zermelo developed the new theory, and showed that the problem with Naive Theory was it permitted the construction of a small set, and then permitted the construction of a larger set which contained the smaller set. Zermelo showed that Set Theory has to begin with the 'infinite set' and use that set to create smaller sets. The barber is an entity that is illogical, cannot be instantiated, and cannot exist. Therefore, the barber is not in the 'infinite set' and when you get down to the set known as the 'village', the barber is not there. This sounds trivial when we talk about a barber, but it's actually not. Set Theory is foundational for mathematics, and the axioms it is based on have to be accurate. In mathematics, you have to be able to give proof that a theory is accurate. After a theory is proven accurate, it will be accurate for eternity (the Pythagorean theorem will be accurate a trillion years from now). Russell looked at Naive Theory and said 'Houston, we have a problem'. There are problems with the construction of an 'infinite set' because a 'set' is bounded, while infinity is boundless, and if you construct the 'infinite set' you could conceivably have the existence of a set containing an infinite number of 'infinite sets'. These problems are the reason why mathematicians have nervous breakdowns.
Great review, the Collector is a fascinating read. The French Lieutenant's Woman is also a good read by John Fowles, I remember making a trip to Lyme Regis in Dorset after reading it.
I have that one to read too! :D
Never heard of it, but it sounds exactly like something I'd really be into. Definitely going to pick this one up. Thanks for the review!
Oh, def do! Would love to hear your take on it! It's a very conflicting book, emotionally. Which always makes for interesting reading. :)
Sounds great! Added to my TBR!
Hope you like it as much as I did! :)
Always wanted to read this, haven't gotten to it yet. Thanks.
It's definitely one worth reading! :)
Great review. I found this novel disturbingly gripping and extremely well-written. However, I found some of the backstory of the kidnapped woman was excessive in detail, which reduced the intensity of the novel and watered-down the tension.
I did sorta wonder why she went on with so much of her history, but all in all it rounded her out as a character more so it was all good by me. :)
Can you do your top 10-20 books of all time?
Already done it! Try this:
th-cam.com/video/IQSvOQMt0kY/w-d-xo.html
A collection within a collection, a set within a set, an infinite regress, can't have a painting without a painter, does the barber shave himself? If he does, then he doesn't.
Exactly. Maybe at the end of the day, we're all just butterflies under the glass of some grand lepidopterist. :o
@@TH3F4LC0NxYes, but it's difficult to include that damn barber (if you are not familiar with Bertrand Russell's barber paradox, check it out).
I thought I had a unique solution by answering that the barber was female.
For those interested, the paradox is explained here: th-cam.com/video/lK5dWZZMfeo/w-d-xo.html
Lol....females shave, but I won't go into details about where they shave. That video you posted is helpful, but there's more to the story. Obviously, we are not specifically concerned about a barber, we are concerned with Set Theory. Russell showed that the old theory, known as Naive Theory, could no longer be used; a new theory was needed. Ernst Zermelo developed the new theory, and showed that the problem with Naive Theory was it permitted the construction of a small set, and then permitted the construction of a larger set which contained the smaller set. Zermelo showed that Set Theory has to begin with the 'infinite set' and use that set to create smaller sets. The barber is an entity that is illogical, cannot be instantiated, and cannot exist. Therefore, the barber is not in the 'infinite set' and when you get down to the set known as the 'village', the barber is not there. This sounds trivial when we talk about a barber, but it's actually not. Set Theory is foundational for mathematics, and the axioms it is based on have to be accurate. In mathematics, you have to be able to give proof that a theory is accurate. After a theory is proven accurate, it will be accurate for eternity (the Pythagorean theorem will be accurate a trillion years from now). Russell looked at Naive Theory and said 'Houston, we have a problem'. There are problems with the construction of an 'infinite set' because a 'set' is bounded, while infinity is boundless, and if you construct the 'infinite set' you could conceivably have the existence of a set containing an infinite number of 'infinite sets'. These problems are the reason why mathematicians have nervous breakdowns.