The standard language of maps (aka functions) over sets will give you want you want. Category theory is not needed.
On Sat, Aug 09, 2008 at 08:58:02PM -0600, Nicholas Thompson wrote: > Roseners, and anybody else vaguely interested in category theory. > > Rosen seems to be interested in situations in which A maps to B but not all > the values in B can be generated by the mapping. > > this is a lot like the Intension and the Extension of an utterance. I say > with assurance that Mrs. Vanderbilt wished to sail on the Titanic. In this > case, Mrs Vanderbilt's "wanting" is a function (mathematical sense) that > maps from her wants to a subset of the properties of the Titanic. All the > properties of the Titanic constitute (in philosophic lingo ) it's extension. > The subset, the "image" of Mrs Vanderbilt's wanting , constitutes the > intension of her utterance, "I want to sail on the Titanic." Among the > titanic's attributes, but outside that image, is the property "hit an iceberg > in the North Atlantic and sank." > > I guess the question is whether there is a less tortured mathematics than > category theory that would allow one to talk about these things. > > N > > > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology, > Clark University ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Mathematics UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
