| Description: Define the proper
substitution of a class for a set.
 
     When   is a proper
class, our definition evaluates to false.  This is
     somewhat arbitrary: we could have, instead, chosen the conclusion of
     sbc6 3015 for our definition, which always evaluates to
true for proper
     classes.
 
     Our definition also does not produce the same results as discussed in the
     proof of Theorem 6.6 of [Quine] p. 42
(although Theorem 6.6 itself does
     hold, as shown by dfsbcq 2991 below).  Unfortunately, Quine's definition
     requires a recursive syntactical breakdown of  , and it does not
     seem possible to express it with a single closed formula.
 
     If we did not want to commit to any specific proper class behavior, we
     could use this definition only to prove Theorem dfsbcq 2991, which holds
     for both our definition and Quine's, and from which we can derive a weaker
     version of df-sbc 2990 in the form of sbc8g 2997.  However, the behavior of
     Quine's definition at proper classes is similarly arbitrary, and for
     practical reasons (to avoid having to prove sethood of   in every use
     of this definition) we allow direct reference to df-sbc 2990 and assert that
           ![].  ].](_drbrack.gif)   is
always false when   is
a proper class.
 
     The related definition df-csb defines proper substitution into a class
     variable (as opposed to a wff variable).  (Contributed by NM,
     14-Apr-1995.)  (Revised by NM, 25-Dec-2016.)  |