We investigate strong versions of enumeration reducibility, the most important one being s-reducibility. We prove that every countable distributive lattice is embeddable into the local structure $L(\mathfrak D_s)$ of the s-degrees. However, $L(\mathfrak D_s)$ is not distributive. We show that on $\Delta^{0}_{2}$ sets s-reducibility coincides with its finite branch version; the same holds of e-reducibility. We prove some density results for $L(\mathfrak D_s)$ . In particular $L(\mathfrak D_s)$ is upwards dense. Among the results about reducibilities that are stronger than s-reducibility, (...) we show that the structure of the $\Delta^{0}_{2}$ bs-degrees is dense. Many of these results on s-reducibility yield interesting corollaries for Q-reducibility as well. (shrink)

Let A be an infinite Δ₂⁰ set and let K be creative: we show that K≤Q A if and only if K≤Q₁ A. (Here ≤Q denotes Q-reducibility, and ≤Q₁ is the subreducibility of ≤Q obtained by requesting that Q-reducibility be provided by a computable function f such that Wf(x)∩ Wf(y)=∅, if x \not= y.) Using this result we prove that A is hyperhyperimmune if and only if no Δ⁰₂ subset B of A is s-complete, i.e., there is no Δ⁰₂ subset (...) B of A such that \overline{K}≤s B, where ≤s denotes s-reducibility, and \overline{K} denotes the complement of K. (shrink)

Let A be an infinite $\Delta _{2}^{0}$ set and let K be creative: we show that K ≤Q A if and only if K ≤Q1 A. (Here ≤Q denotes Q-reducibility, and ≤Q1 is the subreducibility of ≤Q obtained by requesting that Q-reducibility be provided by a computable function f such that Wf(x) ∩ Wf(y) = ∅, if x ≠ y.) Using this result we prove that A is hyperhyperimmune if and only if no $\Delta _{2}^{0}$ subset B of A is (...) s-complete. i.e., there is no $\Delta _{2}^{0}$ subset B of A such that K̄ ≤s B, where ≤s denotes s-reducibility, and K̄ denotes the complement of K. (shrink)

We show that if M is an r‐maximal set, A is a major subset of M, B is an arbitrary set and, then. We prove that the c.e. ‐degrees are not dense. We also show that there exist infinite collections of ‐degrees and such that the following hold: (i) for every i, j,, and,(ii) each consists entirely of r‐maximal sets, and(iii) each consists entirely of non‐r‐maximal hyperhypersimple sets.

We show that the _sQ_-degree of a hypersimple set includes an infinite collection of \(sQ_1\) -degrees linearly ordered under \(\le _{sQ_1}\) with order type of the integers and each c.e. set in these _sQ_-degrees is a hypersimple set. Also, we prove that there exist two c.e. sets having no least upper bound on the \(sQ_1\) -reducibility ordering. We show that the c.e. \(sQ_1\) -degrees are not dense and if _a_ is a c.e. \(sQ_1\) -degree such that \(o_{sQ_1}, then there exist (...) infinitely many pairwise _sQ_-incomputable c.e. _sQ_-degrees \(\{c_i\}_{i\in \omega }\) such that \((\forall \,i)\;(a. (shrink)

We use certain strong Q-reducibilities, and their corresponding strong positive reducibilities, to characterize the hyperimmune sets and the hyperhyperimmune sets: if A is any infinite set then A is hyperimmune (respectively, hyperhyperimmune) if and only if for every infinite subset B of A, one has \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\overline{K}\not\le_{\rm ss} B}$$\end{document} (respectively, \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\overline{K}\not\le_{\overline{\rm s}} B}$$\end{document}): here \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\le_{\overline{\rm (...) s}}}$$\end{document} is the finite-branch version of s-reducibility, ≤ss is the computably bounded version of \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\le_{\overline{\rm s}}}$$\end{document}, and \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\overline{K}}$$\end{document} is the complement of the halting set. Restriction to \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\Sigma^0_2}$$\end{document} sets provides a similar characterization of the \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\Sigma^0_2}$$\end{document} hyperhyperimmune sets in terms of s-reducibility. We also show that no \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${A \geq_{\overline{\rm s}}\overline{K}}$$\end{document} is hyperhyperimmune. As a consequence, \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\deg_{\rm s}(\overline{K})}$$\end{document} is hyperhyperimmune-free, showing that the hyperhyperimmune s-degrees are not upwards closed. (shrink)

We show that the Q-degree of a hyperhypersimple set includes an infinite collection of Q1-degrees linearly ordered under \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\leq_{Q_1}}$$\end{document} with order type of the integers and consisting entirely of hyperhypersimple sets. Also, we prove that the c.e. Q1-degrees are not an upper semilattice. The main result of this paper is that the Q1-degree of a hemimaximal set contains only one c.e. 1-degree. Analogous results are valid for \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} (...) \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\Pi_1^0}$$\end{document}s1-degrees. (shrink)

We show that the c.e. Q1,N\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${Q_{1,N}}$$\end{document}-degrees are not an upper semilattice. We prove that if M is an r-maximal set, A is an arbitrary set and M≡Q1,NA\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${M \equiv{}_ {Q_{1,N}}A}$$\end{document}, then M≤mA\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${M\leq{}_{m} A}$$\end{document}. Also, if M1 and M2 are r-maximal sets, A and B are major subsets of M1 and M2, respectively, and M1\A≡Q1,NM2\B\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} (...) \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${M_{1}{\setminus} A\equiv{}_{Q_{1,N}}M_{2}{\setminus} B}$$\end{document}, then M1\A≡mM2\B\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${M_{1}{\setminus}A\equiv{}_{m}M_{2}{\setminus} B}$$\end{document}. If M1 and M2 are r-maximal sets and M10,M11\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${M_{1}^{0},\,M_{1}^{1}}$$\end{document} and M20,M21\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${M_{2}^{0},\,M_{2}^{1}}$$\end{document} are nontrivial splittings of M1 and M2, respectively, then M10≡Q1,NM20\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${M_{1}^{0} \equiv{}_{Q_{1,N}}M_{2}^{0}}$$\end{document} if and only if M10≡1M20\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${M_{1}^{0} \equiv{}_{1}M_{2}^{0}}$$\end{document}. From this result follows that if A and B are Friedberg splitting of an r-maximal set, then the Q1,N\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${Q_{1,N}}$$\end{document}-degree of A contains only one c.e. 1-degree. (shrink)

We prove that if $A$, $B$ are noncomputable c.e. sets, $A<_{sQ_{1}}B$ and [($B$ is not simple and $A\oplus B\leq _{sQ_{1}}B$) or $B\equiv _{sQ_{1}}B\times \omega $], then there exist infinitely many pairwise $sQ_{1}$-incomparable c.e. sets $\{C_{i}\}_{i\in \omega }$ such that $A<_{sQ_{1}}C_{i}<_{sQ_{1}}B$, for all $i\in \omega $. We also show that there exist infinite collections of $sQ_{1}$-degrees $\{\boldsymbol {a_{i}}\}_{i\in \omega }$ and $\{\boldsymbol {b_{i}}\}_{i\in \omega }$ such that for every $i, j,$ (1) $\boldsymbol {a_{i}}<_{sQ_{1}}\boldsymbol {a_{i+1}}$, $\boldsymbol {b_{j+1}}<_{sQ_{1}}\boldsymbol {b_{j}}$ and $\boldsymbol {a_{i}}<_{sQ_{1}}\boldsymbol {b_{j}}$; (...) (2) every c.e set in $\boldsymbol {a_{i}}$ is a maximal set; and (3) every c.e. set in $\boldsymbol {b_{j}}$ is a non-maximal hyperhypersimple set. We prove that a noncomputable c.e. $sQ$-degree contains either only one or infinitely many c.e. $sQ_{1}$-degrees. The $sQ_{1}$-degrees of c.e. cylinders are dense upper semilattice. (shrink)

We prove that a computably enumerable set A is effectively speedable (effectively levelable) if and only if there exists a splitting (A₀,A₁) of A such that both A₀ and A₁ are effectively speedable (effectively levelable). These results answer two questions raised by J. B. Remmel.

We show: for every noncomputable c.e. incomplete c-degree, there exists a nonspeedable c-degree incomparable with it; The c-degree of a hypersimple set includes an infinite collection of \-degrees linearly ordered under \ with order type of the integers and consisting entirely of hypersimple sets; there exist two c.e. sets having no c.e. least upper bound in the \-reducibility ordering; the c.e. \-degrees are not dense.

In this paper we study structural properties of n-c. e. Q-degrees. Two theorems contain results on the distribution of incomparable Q-degrees. In another theorem we prove that every incomplete Q-degree forms a minimal pair in the c. e. degrees with a Q-degree. In a further theorem it is proved that there exists a c. e. Q-degree that is not half of a minimal pair in the c. e. Q-degrees.

This volume describes the current "main contenders," including neo-Piagetian, neo-connectionist, neo-innatist and sociocultural models.

For courses in European Intellectual History. An exploration of the major issues in thought -- from the French Revolution to Structuralism and beyond.

Une approche philosophique de la prière à des fins politiques est possible dans le cas où les deux substantifs sont mis en relais inconditionnel. Le premier élément responsable de cette filature des liens c’est la présence de l’autre. Prier et faire de la politique sont deux activités humaines trop humaines qui exigent l’ouverture à l’autre, pour l’autre comme pour l’édification de sa propre identité individuelle et collective. Comme les rites et les cultes, la liturgie, notamment la prière collective, a un (...) effet thérapeutique, et pédagogique, disons didactique et sociopolitique. Elle calme les esprits, la volonté, apaise l’angoisse et solidifie les liens sociaux. L'Eglise, par exemple, est née du rassemblement du peuple de Dieu en prière et c'est dans son sein que toute célébration liturgique trouve perpétuellement son accomplissement aussi bien que sa régénération dans l’invocation du nom du Christ-Vérité, Rédempteur, Fondateur, Roi et Prêtre. La présente étude sur « Vérité et Royauté » focalise l’attention sur l’essence même du politique qui se nourrit du religieux tout en lui fournissant gloire, pouvoir et moyens d’existence. (shrink)

Drawing on mostly ignored texts, this book thoroughly reassesses Marx and Engels's engagement with theology.

[1] Sefer Orḥot Ḥayim leha-Rosh ʻim beʼur "ha-Shem orḥotenu" ... 2. Ḳunṭres Be-Shaʻar ha-melekh ʻal haḳdamat ha-Rambam, kolel tsiyunim u-meḳorim u-veʼurim be-divre ha-Rambam ṿeha-Raʼabad ... 3. Ḳunṭres Tashlum yefeh ʻenayim ʻal Seder Zeraʻim u-Ṭehorot, ʻeduyot, Tamid, Midot, Ḳenim ṿe-ʻod ṿe-hu tsiyunim ʻal mas. elu mi-Yerushalmi u-midrashim ... 4. Ḳunṭres Marʼot maḳom, ṿe-hu tsiyunim ʻal ha-meḳomot she-Rashi ṿe-Tos. meviʼim mirdrash o Yerushalmi ṿe-Tosefta ṿe-khu. ṿe-lo tsuyan meḳoro ... 5. Ḳunṭres Ṭeʻama de-ḳara, ṿe-hu ḳetsat ḥidushim ʻal ha-Torah ṿe-ʻal Neviʼim u-Khetuvim -- ḥeleḳ (...) 3. Heʻarot ʻal seder ha-Shas (ṿe-kholel gam ezeh ḳunṭresim). (shrink)

The experimental philosophy movement advocates the use of empirical methods in philosophy. The methods most often discussed and in fact employed in experimental philosophy are appropriated from the experimental paradigm in psychology. But there is a variety of other (at least partly) empirical methods from various disciplines that are and others that could be used in philosophy. The paper explores the application of corpus analysis to philosophical issues. Although the method is well established in linguistics, there are only a few (...) tentative attempts of philosophers to utilise it. Examples are introduced and the merit of corpus analysis is compared to that of using general internet search engines and questionnaires for similar purposes. (shrink)