 To say that \(D_f\) is not an element of \(B\), where \(B\) is the range of \(f\), is to say that there is no element \(x\) of \(A\) such that \(f(x) = D_f\). Applied to predicates and their extensions,  CL  implies that for any function \(g\) mapping some predicates \(A\) to their extensions, there is a predicate “heterological\(_g\)” whose extension is \(D_g\) although this predicate cannot be in the domain of \(g\). However, assuming that there is a function, \(h\), mapping every predicate to its extension, there can be no predicate, heterological\(_h\), at all, whose extension is \(D_h\). From a Tarskian point of view, heterological\(_h\), must be a predicate of the metalanguage. From Church’s point of view, there are a multiplicity of heterological predicates analogous to, but not the same as, the heterological\(_g\) predicates, distinguished by their types and orders in the ramified hierarchy. CL is exploited in the next section.