I'm trying to understand the categorical definition of a product, which describes them in terms of existence of a unique morphism that makes such-and-such a diagram commute. I don't really feel I've totally understood the motivation for this definition: in particular, why must that morphism be unique? What's the consequence of omitting the requirement for uniqueness in, say, Set?
Uniqueness of morphism in definition of category theory product (etc)
7
$\begingroup$
category-theory
-
0If you omit uniqueness, then any set admitting a surjective map to the usual cartesian product would satisfy the "universal" property. – 2012-07-10