Re: The humility topos

[Toby Bartels <toby+categories@ugcs.caltech.edu>]

Michael Barr wrote in part:

>Aside from wanting to know what was meant here, should the first quote
>have put humility topos in quotes, for example, I would also like to know
>what is the subobject classifier of the humility topos.

As for what is meant, these links seem to be relevant:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inventio#Topoi
http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/lit_terms_h.html#humility_topos_anchor
I don't think that "humility topos" should be in quotation marks,
although it looks like "topos" is supposed to be italicised
(as a foreign word, always with the foregin plural "topoi").

If anybody knows an eager literary theorist,
see if you can get a response to the question
"What classifies parts in the humility topos?"
(using the term "part" instead of "subobject" to make it more accessible).

The best answer that I could get from the Internet
is the 1601 Elizabethan Poor Law.
But I fear that this is in too restricted a context
(the subobject classifier of some slice of the humility topos).
http://books.google.com/books?id=f9_a4d0j9DQC&pg=PA262&dq=classify+part+"humility+topos"%3F&ots=entEEqom3l


--Toby


[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]