Skip to main content
MathOverflow

Return to Question

Became Hot Network Question
Clarified statement.
Source Link
varkor
varkor
  • 10.7k
  • 29
  • 72

In "Partial Horn logic and cartesian categories", E. Palmgren and S. J. Vickers state without proof that "The theory of categories is not algebraic." Is there a reference, or an elementary argument, for this fact? In particular, I'm interested in the setting where "algebraic" refers to the multisorted, potentially infinitary setting.

To be precise, this would entail showing that there is no monadic functor from $\mathbf{Cat} \to \mathbf{Set}/S$ for any set $S$.

In "Partial Horn logic and cartesian categories", E. Palmgren and S. J. Vickers state without proof that "The theory of categories is not algebraic." Is there a reference, or an elementary argument, for this fact? In particular, I'm interested in the setting where "algebraic" refers to the multisorted, potentially infinitary setting.

In "Partial Horn logic and cartesian categories", E. Palmgren and S. J. Vickers state without proof that "The theory of categories is not algebraic." Is there a reference, or an elementary argument, for this fact? In particular, I'm interested in the setting where "algebraic" refers to the multisorted, potentially infinitary setting.

To be precise, this would entail showing that there is no monadic functor from $\mathbf{Cat} \to \mathbf{Set}/S$ for any set $S$.

Source Link
varkor
varkor
  • 10.7k
  • 29
  • 72

Why is the theory of small categories not algebraic?

In "Partial Horn logic and cartesian categories", E. Palmgren and S. J. Vickers state without proof that "The theory of categories is not algebraic." Is there a reference, or an elementary argument, for this fact? In particular, I'm interested in the setting where "algebraic" refers to the multisorted, potentially infinitary setting.