Assume $k$ is a division ring and $M$ an infinite set. There are two vector spaces over $k$ to consider: $k^M$ and $k^{(M)}$ (the latter is the subset of $k^M$ containing all infinite sequence with only a finite number of nonzero components).
Obviously $|k^{(M)}|\leq |k^M|$. I know that $k^{(M)}$ has a canonical basis $(e_\mu)_{\mu\in M}$. This means that $(e_\mu)_{\mu\in M}$ is a family of linearly independent elements of $k^M$. How can I show that the $e_\mu$'s don't generate $k^M$? I have to find an element of $k^M$ that isn't a linear combination of the $e_\mu$. What is a good choice for this supposed element? (Or is a proof by contradiction more appropriate?)
Finding such an element would not be enough, as it would simply show that the inclusion $k^{(M)}\to k^M$ isn't an isomorphism, but that doesn't mean that there is no isomorphism.
For the record, the constant family with value $1$ is not in the span of the $e_\mu$.
The usual way to prove that they are not isomorphic is to prove that any $M$-indexed family does not span $k^M$ - in fact that would be equivalent because one can extract a basis from any such family, and it must then have cardinality $\geq |M|$ and $\leq |M|$ so $=|M|$. But for some reason I always forget the standard argument for this - it's a sort of diagonal argument where you build a new element not in the span of any $M$-indexed family of elements.
So another way to proceed is to prove that $k^{(M)}$ has too many linearly independent linear forms. Indeed, $(k^{(M)})^* \cong k^M$ (canonically), and so these linearly independent linear forms contradict the existence of an isomorphism.
For this I will use the following well-known set-theoretic lemma:
The proof then goes as follows (hidden, to leave some suspense):