Re: Re: Terminology; categorical versus categorial.

[Charles Wells <charles@abstractmath.org>]

Logicians also use "categorical" to refer to a theory with just one
model.  --Charles

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Graham White <graham@eecs.qmul.ac.uk> wrote:
> One factor might be that the philosophical tradition also has the
> terminology "category", but means rather different things by it,
> and they tend to use "categorial" (I think, but I haven't really
> checked). In particular, both Kant and Husserl use categorial a lot.
> So (since we started using the word category later than the philosophers
> did) saying "categorical" is a way of avoiding confusion.
>
> (Philosophers do use the pair hypothetical/categorical as a way of
> talking about preconditions for assertions, but that's so different from
> what we do that it's unlikely to cause confusion). All of this is off
> the top of my head, and could do with checking.
>
> Graham
>
> On 06/09/12 19:39, peasthope@shaw.ca wrote:
>>
>> Apologies in case this story is in the archive.  I failed to find it.
>>
>> According to online dictionaries, categorical and categorial can be
>> synonyms.  Almost everyone seems to prefer categorical whereas
>> categorial comes from the simple rule of replacing the last vowel of
>> the noun with "ial".
>>
>> So, is the preference for categorical just an inheritance from early
>> authors?  Is there a stronger reason to use it?  Is the explanation
>> in the archive?
>>
>> Thanks,            ... Peter E.
>>
>>
>>
>

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