Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeMar 18th 2015
   • (edited Mar 18th 2015)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexI gave _[[Sets for Mathematics]]_ a category:reference entry and linked to it from _[[ETCS]]_ and from _[[set theory]]_, to start with. David Corfield kindly alerts me, which I had missed before, that appendix C.1 there has a clear statement of Lawvere's proposal from 94 of how to think of categorical logic as formalizing [[objective and subjective logic]] (to which enty I have now added the relevant quotes).

   I gave Sets for Mathematics a category:reference entry and linked to it from ETCS and from set theory, to start with.

   David Corfield kindly alerts me, which I had missed before, that appendix C.1 there has a clear statement of Lawvere’s proposal from 94 of how to think of categorical logic as formalizing objective and subjective logic (to which enty I have now added the relevant quotes).

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeJul 7th 2020
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexadded [doi:10.1017/CBO9780511755460](https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511755460) <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Sets+for+Mathematics/6">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Sets+for+Mathematics/6">v6</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Sets+for+Mathematics">current</a>

   added doi:10.1017/CBO9780511755460

   diff, v6, current