Robert Goss
The main issue is that the objects of the category (represented by the id morphism) are in bijection to some set of haskell types.
[...]
Now this all makes sense Haskell's categories are for reasoning about programs while I want to use it more for pure maths. Has anyone else had a similar problem with categories in haskell? Or am I missing a way of implementing such structures within the standard Category framework for haskell.
Perhaps what you need is not a programming language like Haskell, but a proof assistant like Agda, where you can express arbitrary categories. A limited form of this is possible in Haskell as well, but the lack of dependent types would force you through a lot of boilerplate and heavy value/type/kind lifting. Greets, Ertugrul -- Not to be or to be and (not to be or to be and (not to be or to be and (not to be or to be and ... that is the list monad.