Re: Every set can be ... ordered?

["MoeBlee"]

tchow@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Surely the empty set is always a
> partial ordering on X.

If there is a difference between 'of' and 'on', I mean a partially
ordering OF x. I.e., there is a reflexive, antisymmetric, and
transitive relation R such that the field of R is x. Isn't that what we
mean by 'there is a partial ordering of x', or 'x is partially
ordered', or 'x has a partial ordering'?

MoeBlee