Questions: Russell's Theory of Definite Descriptions

Question 1

According to Russell's analysis, the sentence 'The present King of France is bald' is best understood as asserting which combination of claims?

• A. It names the King and attributes baldness to him
• B. There exists exactly one present King of France, and that individual is bald
• C. The concept 'King of France' applies to someone who is bald
• D. The sentence is meaningless because France has no king

Answer: (B)

Russell's analysis unpacks 'the F is G' into three claims: (1) there exists at least one F, (2) there exists at most one F (uniqueness), and (3) whatever is F is also G. The sentence is thus false (not meaningless), because claim (1) fails — France has no king. This avoids the puzzle of what a sentence means when its apparent subject doesn't exist.

Question 2

Russell agreed with Frege that definite descriptions function as names that refer directly to objects.

• T. True
• F. False

Answer: False

This is the core misconception the theory is designed to reject. Russell explicitly argued that definite descriptions are not names and have no referents. They are logically complex quantified expressions that contribute truth-conditions rather than a referent to a sentence. This is precisely what distinguishes Russell's approach from a Fregean one.

Question 3

What philosophical problem does Russell's theory of definite descriptions solve that a simple name-based theory of meaning cannot?

Model answer: It solves the empty-referent problem: how can sentences containing non-denoting descriptions (like 'the present King of France') be meaningful and have determinate truth values? On a name-based theory, a sentence without a referent is meaningless or lacks a truth value. Russell's analysis shows such sentences are meaningful and false — they assert existence and uniqueness claims that simply fail.

If descriptions were names, a sentence like 'The golden mountain is in California' would fail to say anything at all, since there is no golden mountain. Russell's logical analysis converts the sentence into a quantified claim (there exists exactly one golden mountain, and it is in California) which is simply false — a much more satisfying result.