Introduction Comparative psychology can generally be defined as the branch of psychology that studies the similarities and differences in the behavior of organisms. Formal definitions found in textbooks and encyclopedias disagree whether comparative psychologists restrict their work to the study of animals or include the study of human behavior. This paper offers an opinion on the major problem facing comparative psychology today – where we will find the next generation of comparative psychology students. Something must be done before we lose (...) access to an entire generation of psychology undergraduates. It is not enough to say that comparative psychology is being “absorbed” in other academic units such as “integrative biology”, “integrative study of animal behavior”, “evolutionary psychology”, “comparative cognition”, or “animal cognition.” Indeed, many of these topics are not primarily studied in psychology departments, wherein comparative psychology students have traditionally received joint training in the principles of behavior and comparative analysis, as applied to both humans and other animals. Consider, for example, the difference between comparative psychology and comparative cognition. Comparative cognition includes features of comparative psychology, but they are not identical. Comparative cognition represents a very specific theoretical position whose validity is based on certain suppositions such as the belief (by definition) that the internal cogni... (shrink)

We explore a notion of pseudofinite dimension, introduced by Hrushovski and Wagner, on an infinite ultraproduct of finite structures. Certain conditions on pseudofinite dimension are identified that guarantee simplicity or supersimplicity of the underlying theory, and that a drop in pseudofinite dimension is equivalent to forking. Under a suitable assumption, a measure-theoretic condition is shown to be equivalent to local stability. Many examples are explored, including vector spaces over finite fields viewed as 2-sorted finite structures, and homocyclic groups. Connections are (...) made to products of sets in finite groups, in particular to word maps, and a generalization of Tao's Algebraic Regularity Lemma is noted. (shrink)

We show, for various classes of totally ordered structures, including o‐minimal and weakly o‐minimal structures, that every definable partial order on a subset of extends definably in to a total order. This extends the result proved in for and o‐minimal.

Given a theoryTextending that of dense linear orders without endpoints, in a language ℒ ⊇ {<}, we are interested in extensionsT′ ofTin languages extending ℒ by unary relation symbols that are each interpreted in models ofT′ as sets that are both dense and codense in the underlying sets of the models.There is a canonically “wild” example, namelyT= Th andT′ = Th. Recall thatTis o-minimal, and so every open set definable in any model ofThas only finitely many definably connected components. But (...) it is well known that 〈ℝ, <, +, · ℚ 〉 defines every real Borel set, in particular, every open subset of any finite cartesian power of ℝ and every subset of any finite cartesian power of ℚ. To put this another way, the definable open sets in models ofTare essentially as simple as possible, whileT′ has a model where the definable open sets are as complicated as possible, as is the structure induced on the new predicate.In contrast to the preceding example, if ℝalgis the set of real algebraic numbers andT′ Th, then no model ofT′ defines any open set that is not definable in the underlying model ofT. (shrink)

O-minimal structures have long been thought to occupy the base of a hierarchy of ordered structures, in analogy with the role that strongly minimal structures play with respect to stable theories. This is the first in an anticipated series of papers whose aim is the development of model theory for ordered structures of rank greater than one. A class of ordered structures to which a notion of finite rank can be assigned, the decomposable structures, is introduced here. These include all (...) ordered structures definable in o-minimal structures. The principal result in this paper, Theorem 5.1, asserts roughly that a decomposable structure [Formula: see text] can be partitioned into finitely many definable subsets such that on each set the restriction of < is a "twisted lexicographic" order. As a consequence, for all n and linear orders ≺ definable on a subset X ⊆ Mn in an o-minimal structure [Formula: see text], there is a definable partition of X such that the restriction of ≺ to each set in the partition is "lexicographic". (shrink)

We study o-minimal expansions of Archimedean totally ordered groups. We first prove that any such expansion must be elementarily embeddable via a unique (provided some nonzero element is 0-definable) elementary embedding into a unique o-minimal expansion of the additive ordered group of real numbers R. We then show that a definable function in an o-minimal expansion of R enjoys good differentiability properties and use this to prove that an Archimedean real closed field is definable in any nonsemilinear expansion of R. (...) Combining these results, we obtain several restrictions on possible o-minimal expansions of arbitrary Archimedean ordered groups and in particular of the rational ordered group. (shrink)

For a countable complete o-minimal theory T, we introduce the notion of a sequentially complete model of T. We show that a model M of T is sequentially complete if and only if $\mathscr{M} \prec \mathscr{N}$ for some Dedekind complete model N. We also prove that if T has a Dedekind complete model of power greater than 2 ℵ 0 , then T has Dedekind complete models of arbitrarily large powers. Lastly, we show that a dyadic theory--namely, a theory relative (...) to which every formula is equivalent to a Boolean combination of formulas in two variables--that has some Dedekind complete model has Dedekind complete models in arbitrarily large powers. (shrink)

It is shown that if is an o-minimal structure such that is a dense total order and ≾ is a parameter-definable partial order on M, then ≾ has an extension to a definable total order.

This book provides a timely, compelling, multidisciplinary critique of the largely tacit set of assumptions funding Modernity in the West. A partnership between Michael Polanyi and Charles Taylor's thought promises to cast the errors of the past in a new light, to graciously show how these errors can be amended, and to provide a specific cartography of how we can responsibly and meaningfully explore new possibilities for ethics, political society, and religion in a post-modern modernity.

James I. The Political Works of James I. Reprinted from the Edition of 1616. With an Introduction by Charles Howard McIlwain. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1918. cxi, 354 pp. Reprinted 2002 by The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd.

This volume sets Berkeley's philosophy in its historical context by providing selections from: firstly, works that deeply influenced Berkeley as he formed his main doctrines; secondly, works that illuminate the philosophical climate in which those doctrines were formed; and thirdly, works that display Berkeley's subsequent philosophical influence. The first category is represented by selections from Descartes, Malebranche, Bayle, and Locke; the second category includes extracts from such thinkers as Regius, Lanion, Arnauld, Lee, and Norris; while reactions to Berkeley, both positive (...) and negative, are drawn from a wide range of thinkers - Leibniz, Baxter, Hume, Diderot, Voltaire, Reid, Kant, Herder, and Mill. (shrink)