Definite descriptions like "the Queen of England" refer to unique individuals. But what happens when the described object doesn't exist? Russell's theory tackles this, stating that statements with non-referring descriptions are false, not meaningless.
Russell's approach eliminates the need for non-existent objects in our understanding of language. By analyzing statements as complex propositions, we can avoid logical puzzles and contradictions that arise from talking about things that don't exist.
Definite Descriptions and Existence
Definite descriptions and object existence
Top images from around the web for Definite descriptions and object existence
Frontiers | Developmental Changes in Children’s Processing of Redundant Modifiers in Definite ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Definite descriptions and negative existential quantifiers | Philosophical Studies View original
Is this image relevant?
Presupposition, assertion, and definite descriptions | Linguistics and Philosophy View original
Is this image relevant?
Frontiers | Developmental Changes in Children’s Processing of Redundant Modifiers in Definite ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Definite descriptions and negative existential quantifiers | Philosophical Studies View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Definite descriptions and object existence
Frontiers | Developmental Changes in Children’s Processing of Redundant Modifiers in Definite ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Definite descriptions and negative existential quantifiers | Philosophical Studies View original
Is this image relevant?
Presupposition, assertion, and definite descriptions | Linguistics and Philosophy View original
Is this image relevant?
Frontiers | Developmental Changes in Children’s Processing of Redundant Modifiers in Definite ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Definite descriptions and negative existential quantifiers | Philosophical Studies View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Definite descriptions refer to a unique individual using phrases like "the X" ("the Queen of England")
For a to successfully refer, the described object must exist
Non-referring definite descriptions fail to refer to anything due to the non-existence of the described object
addresses logical issues arising from non-referring definite descriptions
According to Russell, statements with non-referring definite descriptions are false, not meaningless
Referential vs attributive descriptions
: speaker has a particular individual in mind and uses the description to refer to them ("The person I met yesterday was kind")
: speaker does not have a particular individual in mind but uses the description to refer to whoever fits the description ("The fastest runner will win the race")
Truth values of non-referring descriptions
According to Russell, statements with non-referring definite descriptions are false
"The current King of France is bald" is false because there is no current King of France
The statement can be analyzed as a conjunction of three propositions:
There exists an x such that x is the current King of France
For all y, if y is the current King of France, then y is identical to x
x is bald
If any of these propositions are false, the entire statement is false
Russell's theory for non-existent objects
Russell's theory eliminates the need for non-existent objects in our ontology
Statements with non-referring definite descriptions are analyzed as complex propositions that do not commit to the existence of the described object
"The golden mountain is tall" can be analyzed as:
∃x(Gx∧Mx∧∀y((Gy∧My)→y=x)∧Tx)
There exists an x such that:
x is golden
x is a mountain
For all y, if y is golden and a mountain, then y is identical to x
x is tall
Analyzing statements this way avoids logical puzzles and contradictions arising from non-existent objects