Recently I learned that for any set A, we have $\varnothing\subset A$.
I found some explanation of why it holds.
$\varnothing\subset A$ means "for every object $x$, if $x$ belongs to the empty set, then $x$ also belongs to the set A". This is a vacuous truth, because the antecedent ($x$ belongs to the empty set) could never be true, so the conclusion always holds ($x$ also belongs to the set A). So $\varnothing\subset A$ holds.
What confused me was that, the following expression was also a vacuous truth.
For every object $x$, if $x$ belongs to the empty set, then $x$ doesn't belong to the set A.
According to the definition of the vacuous truth, the conclusion ($x$ doesn't belong to the set A) holds, so $\varnothing\not\subset A$ would be true, too.
Which one is correct? Or is it just a convention to let $\varnothing\subset A$?
Best Answer
There’s no conflict: you’ve misinterpreted the second highlighted statement. What it actually says is that $\varnothing$ and $A$ have no element in common, i.e., that $\varnothing\cap A=\varnothing$. This is not the same as saying that $\varnothing$ is not a subset of $A$, so it does not conflict with the fact that $\varnothing\subseteq A$.
To expand on that a little, the statement $B\nsubseteq A$ does not say that if $x\in B$, then $x\notin A$; it says that there is at least one $x\in B$ that is not in $A$. This is certainly not true if $B=\varnothing$.