0-categorical o-minimal structures were completely described by Pillay and Steinhorn 565–592), and are essentially built up from copies of the rationals as an ordered set by ‘cutting and copying’. Here we investigate the possible structures which an 0-categorical weakly o-minimal set may carry, and find that there are some rather more interesting examples. We show that even here the possibilities are limited. We subdivide our study into the following principal cases: the structure is 1-indiscernible, in which case all possibilities are (...) classified up to binary structure; the structure is 2-indiscernible, classified up to ternary structure; the structure is 3-indiscernible, in which case we show that it is k-indiscernible for every finite k. We also make some remarks about the possible structures of higher arities which an 0-categorical weakly o-minimal structure may carry. (shrink)

Starting from the definition of `amorphous set' in set theory without the axiom of choice, we propose a notion of rank (which will only make sense for, at most, the class of Dedekind finite sets), which is intended to be an analogue in this situation of Morley rank in model theory.

A set is said to be amorphous if it is infinite, but is not the disjoint union of two infinite subsets. Thus amorphous sets can exist only if the axiom of choice is false. We give a general study of the structure which an amorphous set can carry, with the object of eventually obtaining a complete classification. The principal types of amorphous set we distinguish are the following: amorphous sets not of projective type, either bounded or unbounded size of members (...) of partitions of the set into finite pieces), and amorphous sets of projective type, meaning that the set admits a non-degenerate pregeometry, over finite fields either of bounded cardinality or of unbounded cardinality. The hope is that all amorphous sets will be of one of these types. Examples of each sort are constructed, and a reconstruction result for bounded amorphous sets is presented, indicating that the amorphous sets of this kind constructed in the paper are the only possible ones. The final section examines some questions concerned with the resulting cardinal arithmetic. (shrink)

I wish to thank Klaus Kühnle who streamlined in [8] several of my definitions and proofs concerning the subject matter of this paper. Some ideas and results arose from discussions with Klaus Leeb. Jan Johannsen discovered some mistakes in an earlier version.