Definite

Descriptions
Presented by: Nouman
Khan.
MS in English.
COMSATS University,
Islamabad.
Presented to: Dr
Fasih Ahmed

Russel’s Solution to the Four

Logical Puzzles
Singular Terms

– Paradigmatic Referring Devices

– Proper Names
– Definite Descriptions
– Singular Personal Pronouns
– Demonstrative Pronouns
Referential Theory and Singular
Terms
– Despite its lack of universality, referential theory might be
expected to be true for singular terms.
– Frege and Russel showed that it is not true for definite
descriptions
– Raise doubts whether it be true for ordinary singular items either.
– Four Puzzles about singular terms
Frege and Russel’s Four Puzzles
About Singular Terms
– The Problem of Apparent Reference to Non-existents.
– The Problem of Negative Existentials.
– Frege’s Puzzle About Identity.
– The Problem of Substitutivity.
The Problem of Apparent
Reference to Non-existents
– Hamlet is sad.  (A)
– (A1)  (A) is meaningful (Significant, not meaningless).
– (A2)  (A) is a subject-predicate sentence.
– (A3)  A meaningful subject-predicate sentence pick an individual thing
and ascribe a property to it.
– (A4)  (A)’s subject term fails to denote anything that exist.
– (A5)  Either (A) is meaningless as it doesn’t denote anything that exist
or (A) denote something that does not exist.
– (A6)  There is no such thing as a “non-existent thing”.
The Problem of Negative
Existentials
– Pegasus never existed
– If Pegasus never existed, then what does it refers to?
– If it refers to something then it might as well exist.
Frege’s Puzzle About Identity

– Jahangir is Saleem.
– Trivial in “Jahangir is Jahangir”
– Non-trivial in below situations
– 1. Informative
– 2. Contingent
The Problem of Substitutivity

– Singular items denoting the same object are semantically equivalent.

– Ali believes Samuel Clemens was 5 feet tall
– Ali may not believe that Mark Twain is 5 feet tall as he is unaware that Clemens
wrote under the pen name Mart Twain. Truth value changes.
– Ali may not believe that Mark Twain is also 5 feet tall because he may have seen
a picture of Mark Twain in which he looked 6 feet tall.
Russel’s Theory of Descriptions

– Russel initially posed the four puzzles in terms of definite

descriptions and not proper nouns.
– Russel was interested in the logic of word “the”. He argued in
terms of the four puzzles that “the” have meaning and contributes
to meaning that goes beyond their referents alone.
– Contextual definition of the word “the”.
Logical Constructions Derived
From “The”.
– The does not refer to a simple subject-predicate construction but rather
constitutes more complex constructions involving quantifiers.
– The author of Black Milk is Turkish.
– The above sentence constitutes of 3 quantifier constructions without making
direct reference to Elif Shafak.
– There is at least one author of Black Milk.
– There is at most one author of Black Milk.
– Whoever authored Black Milk is Turkish.
– Logical form as distinct from superficial grammatical form.
Apparent Reference to Non-
Existent
– The present King of France is bald.  (B)
– According to logical form:
– At least one person is presently King of France
– At most one person is presently King of France
– Whoever is presently King of France is bald.
– (B) is not a subject-predicate sentence (no particular individual subject is there).
Hence, Russell says (B) is false.
– Either we reject A2 or A3.
Negative Existentials

– The Present King of France Does not Exist.  (C)

– Consider Russel’s construction of “does not exist” as a predicate like “is bald”.
– At least one person is presently King of France.
– At most one person is presently King of France.
– Whoever is presently King of France does not exist.
– Not does not modify the verb but the whole sentence.
– Not (The present King of France exists) refers to [it is false that: The present
King of France exists]
– No where an individual (refer to previous puzzle) is picked out that he does not
exist so the problem vanishes at least for definite descriptions.
Scope Distinction

– The first logical order of (C) placed description at primary position

and “not” inside its scope as it is governed by the quantifier of
“the” and only modifies “exist” as part of a predicate in the third
sentence of the logical construction without affecting the first 2
quantifiers that describe the subject.
– The second logical order of (C) placed “not” at primary position
and quantifier takes narrow scope. Not is applied to all 3
quantifiers of the logical construction.
Frege’s Identity Puzzle

– The Present Head of Department is [one and the same individual as] Dr. Fasih
(D)
– Let us rephrase it in logical terms
– At least one person is presently Head of Department
– At most one person is presently Head of Department
– Whoever is presently Head of Department is [one and the same individual as]
Dr Fasih.
– It is nontrivial as it is informative and contingent.
Problem With Descriptive
Identity Statements
– (D) is superficially an identity statement but actually it is a
predication (With Dr. Fasih as subject and HOD as a property
assigned to him in reverse order)
– How real identity statements would manage to be both true and
informative?
_____________________________________________________
– This Blank will be filled after going through chapter 3.
Substitutivity

– Albert believe that the author of Nothing and Beingness is a profound

thinker.
– Albert does not know that the author of Nothing and Beingness is also the
author of Sizzling Veterinarians. He thinks that the author of Sizzling
Veterinarians is a cheap moron.
– According to logical construction
– There is at least one Author of Nothing and Beingness.
– There is at most one Author of Nothing and Beingness.
– Whoever is the Author of Nothing and Beingness is a profound thinker.
– It is obvious that we can not substitute the Author of Sizzling Veterinarian in
the above sentence.
Critique on Russel’s Theory

– Russel’s theory is only applicable to a single and very specific subclass of

singular terms.
– Strawson was a figurehead of a very different approach of 20th century
Philosophy. He focused on the real world conversations and studied language in
context.
– According to Strawson, expressions do not refer, people refer through
expressions.
– It is a positive theory that provides a hook between definite description and its
semantic referent although that hook is far less direct than that of a name and
its referent.
Objections 1

– According to Russel, “the King of France is bald” is false as there is no such King.
– Strawson called that verdict implausible as in real life no one will call it false but
would rather not comprehend it and question the presupposition of the
utterance such as “I am not following you; France doesn’t have a king”.
– Strawson denies A3 by stating that the above expression is meaningful as it has
legitimate use in language and can be used to say true or false things in context
and not because it refers to an individual thing.
– Russel thought of meaningful sentence as the one that expresses a proposition
however, Strawson thinks that not every sentence can be true or false as every
meaningful utterance does not make a statement.
Objections 2

– Strawson attributes a claim to Russel that the speaker asserts that at present
existed one and only one King of France. However, it is a misunderstanding as
Russel did not claim anything about the act of asserting. Although the speaker
presupposes this, he does not assert it.
– Fat Tommy can’t run
Objections 3

– Many descriptions are context bound.

– The table is covered with books.
– Ellipsis  What material has been ellipsized?
– Restricted quantification.
– Everyone likes her.
– Nobody goes to that restaurant anymore.
– A Secondary sense in which expressions do refer although Russel insisted that
descriptions are not referring expressions at all.
Objection 4

– Donnellan’s Distinction
– Referential use vs attributive use
– Capitalized description in Title such as The Grateful Dead.
– Smith’s murderer is insane
– Her husband is kind to her
– Who is the man drinking Sprite.
– Near miss cases.
– Albert is an elegant fellow.
– Mean true things by uttering false sentences.
Objective 4 (extensions)

– Speaker reference vs semantic reference

– Speaker’s referent of a description at the occasion of its use is the object, if any,
to which the speaker intends to call the attention of his audience.
– Communication goes by speaker meaning and speaker reference.
– Kripke objects that Donnellan failed to show that a sentence containing a
definite description can be true even if it lacks semantic referent.
Anaphora

– Russell Ignores Plural and generic use of “the” in his theory.

– He also ignores Anaphoric uses although they are singular.
– Anaphoric expression inherits its meaning from another expression.
– The man who lived around the corner was eccentric. He used to snack on turtle heads.
– Pronoun of lazziness (Geach, 1962) that is only a repetition of antecedent phrase.
– Just one turtle came down the street. The turtle was running as if it were being pursued by a
maniac.
– A rabbit appeared in our yard after dinner. The rabbit seemed unconcerned.
– A rabbit  One rabbit
– “in fact, there were several rabbits, and none of them looked very worried.”