|logic||category theory||type theory|
|true||terminal object/(-2)-truncated object||h-level 0-type/unit type|
|false||initial object||empty type|
|proposition||(-1)-truncated object||h-proposition, mere proposition|
|cut rule||composition of classifying morphisms / pullback of display maps||substitution|
|cut elimination for implication||counit for hom-tensor adjunction||beta reduction|
|introduction rule for implication||unit for hom-tensor adjunction||eta conversion|
|logical conjunction||product||product type|
|disjunction||coproduct ((-1)-truncation of)||sum type (bracket type of)|
|implication||internal hom||function type|
|negation||internal hom into initial object||function type into empty type|
|universal quantification||dependent product||dependent product type|
|existential quantification||dependent sum ((-1)-truncation of)||dependent sum type (bracket type of)|
|equivalence||path space object||identity type|
|equivalence class||quotient||quotient type|
|induction||colimit||inductive type, W-type, M-type|
|higher induction||higher colimit||higher inductive type|
|completely presented set||discrete object/0-truncated object||h-level 2-type/preset/h-set|
|set||internal 0-groupoid||Bishop set/setoid|
|universe||object classifier||type of types|
|modality||closure operator, (idemponent) monad||modal type theory, monad (in computer science)|
|linear logic||(symmetric, closed) monoidal category||linear type theory/quantum computation|
|proof net||string diagram||quantum circuit|
|(absence of) contraction rule||(absence of) diagonal||no-cloning theorem|
|synthetic mathematics||domain specific embedded programming language|
Burali-Forti’s paradox is a paradox of naive material set theory that was first observed by Cesare Burali-Forti. A closely related paradox that uses well-founded sets? instead of ordinals is sometimes called Mirimanoff’s paradox.
However, the paradox is not specific to material set theory and can be formulated in structural set theory or in type theory. When formulated in type theory, it is often called Girard’s paradox after Jean-Yves Girard (see at type of types).
There are many variations of the paradox, depending for instance on what precise definition of “well-ordered” (and “ordinal number”) one chooses.
As formulated in type theory by Jean-Yves Girard, the Burali-Forti paradox shows that the original version of Per Martin-Löf’s type theory, which allowed a type of types containg itself as a term , is inconsistent, in the precise sense that it contains (non-normalizing) proofs of false.
English translations of Burali-Forti’s 1897 contributions can be found in
Another early reference on the set-theoretic paradoxes is
Girard’s paradox is discussed in