more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 11222

[filed under theme 4. Formal Logic / F. Set Theory ST / 6. Ordering in Sets ]

Full Idea

The ordered pair <x,y> is defined as the set {{x},{x,y}}. This does captures its essential uses. Pairs <x,y> <u,v> are identical iff x=u and y=v, and the definition satisfies this. Function matters here, not meaning.

Gist of Idea

The ordered pair <x,y> is defined as the set {{x},{x,y}}, capturing function, not meaning

Source

Anil Gupta (Definitions [2008], 1.5)

Book Ref

'Stanford Online Encyclopaedia of Philosophy', ed/tr. Stanford University [plato.stanford.edu], p.5


A Reaction

This is offered as an example of Carnap's 'explications', rather than pure definitions. Quine extols it as a philosophical paradigm (1960:§53).


The 10 ideas with the same theme [ordered sets, and using sets to describe orderings]:

Order rests on 'between' and 'separation' [Russell]
Order depends on transitive asymmetrical relations [Russell]
The ordered pair <x,y> is defined as the set {{x},{x,y}}, capturing function, not meaning [Gupta]
'Well-ordering' must have a least member, so it does the natural numbers but not the integers [Hart,WD]
A 'partial ordering' is irreflexive and transitive; the sets are ordered, but not the subsets [Hart,WD]
A partial ordering becomes 'total' if any two members of its field are comparable [Hart,WD]
Von Neumann defines α<β as α∈β [Hart,WD]
'Well-ordering' of a set is an irreflexive, transitive, and binary relation with a least element [Shapiro]
A collection is 'well-ordered' if there is a least element, and all of its successors can be identified [Lavine]
Ordinals play the central role in set theory, providing the model of well-ordering [Walicki]