Russell’s paradox arises from the belief that you cannot have a set of all sets that are not members of themselves. To which I thought:
The set of all sets encompasses all sets that are not members of themselves, as well as itself. To which a math professor told me:
By a set of all sets that are not members of themselves, we mean a set that encompasses all sets that are not members of themselves, and no other set. To which I thought:
In that case, you cannot have a set of all sets that are members of themselves because it would amount to one set being a member of itself twice (which is contradictory. See the op for proof of this).
In truth, there is one absolute universal set (which I call Existence or Infinity or God). Everything is a member of this set/collection/existent/thing. It is a member of itself (which is the same as saying it is itself. This is not the same as saying it is itself + another of itself combined). Think of it this way: Everything is contingent on God. God is not contingent on anything other than Himself. God is the set of all contingents. God is self-contingent, whilst all other things are not self-contingent.