What do you think is more fundamental, categories sets or types?
>>223429711A buceta da tua mãe
>>223429711Go milk some horses, stop thinking so much.
>What do you think is more fundamentalCute and funny girls
math is just a formal system, it doesn't describe some kind of ultimate reality
>>223429711I only learned about sets in school
>>223429919Formalisation is just a way to describe math, but math isn't just its formalisation
>>223430242math is just its formalization and nothing else, it is a formal system with no determinate content
>>223430348Arithmetic is required by the notion of a formal system which means it can't be just another one
>>223430085What about types?
>>223430348You can look up some works of godel, if you are interested
Dunno how categories or types work, but associations maybe. A set is just a bunch of associated things.
>>223432864Types kinda define which associations could interact
We're not even taught sets in school lol.
literally who cares, just use the three until over time the superior theory shines through instead of just dropping one or two because of petty tribalism
>>223433748We are taught basic sets at 4th grade
>>223429711>came outta brit highschool with hardest maths sub being basic algebra and geometryi WILL improve my maths, i WILL learn category theory, i WILL understand the imaginary, i WILL understand russel & wittgenstein, i WILL understand Leibniz, I swear to god, op and to the anons here
>>223434247Russell and witt are kinda outdated in math space, well they are philosophers first than mathematicians
>>223429711Categories by far. Category theory is the only one that abides isomorphic structures set is incredibly antiquated and derivative of Aristotle and Porphyry's work I'm not kidding too look at the early models for set theory (Porphyry tree) and it's a one to one replica of the Kabbalah. It's borderline mystic knowledge that forces you to accept the sets as true, then piles on more until you break under the weight.
>>223434641Types should be more fundamental according to this
>>223434501either way, it's important that I'm at least able to get to that level before going beyond it
>>223433514Thinking you could build everything up from A->B one-way associations if you're creative, but that's just me pseuding.
'nut on the 'log
