[FOM] a very exciting claim

[Eray Ozkural]

On 3/21/06, Gabriel Stolzenberg <gstolzen at math.bu.edu> wrote:
>    But a classical mathematical can't stop there.  He feels a need
> to say that |x| is defined for all x.  On the other hand, in a
> constructive mindset, one does not feel such a need.  Nothing is
> missing.

Excuse my ignorance. Is this also why in many definitions, the
properties relating to an object of type X, P1, P2, .., PN are given, and there
is an additional property that says "No other object is X"? I am
just trying to understand, because (naively) if I give an
algorithm that enumerates all X, there is no need to make the claim
of negating the rest. Can you please expand on these claims a little
further?

Regards,

--
Eray Ozkural (exa), PhD candidate.  Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara
http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/~erayo  Malfunct: http://www.malfunct.com
ai-philosophy: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ai-philosophy
Pardus: www.uludag.org.tr   KDE Project: http://www.kde.org