Strawson's Theory Of Definition

MODERN ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY
TERM PAPER ASSIGNMENT
I.D 10459836
QUESTION 3.
ACCORDING TO STARWSON, RUSSELL’S THEORY OF DESCRIPTIONS “EMBODIES SOME FUNDAMENTAL MISTAKES “ DISCUSS SOME OF THE OBJECTIONS RAISED AGAINST RUSSELL’S THEORY OF DESCRIPTIONS. HOW COULD ONE DEFEND RUSSELL AGAINST THESE OBJECTIONS BY STRAWSON?

Strawson in his paper “On Referring” argues in relation to Bertand Russell’s theory of description. Strawson argues that expressions do not refer to themselves but instead people refer when they are using expressions. In my essay, I will explain Russell’s theory of description in respect to Strawson’s criticism , critically analyse Strawson’s argument aginst Russell’s theory and also defend Russell against these objections
In demonstrating the problem concerning Russell and Strawson, I would use Russell’s famous example:
1) The present king of france is bald [Russell,1905:485]
For Russell, this sentence has a subject-predicate form and the grammatical subject” the

However if the entailment is false, if Bob is not a man ,then its just false to say Bob is agood man. Because it’s a semantic relationship, if the entailment if the entail proposition is false, then the entire proposition is also false
Presupposition is quite different from that,presupposition doesn’t necessarily hold between sentences. Presupposition is pragmatic relationship. Pragmatic means that it is people who presuppose.but you say sth and presuppose another thing. Presupposition means that its not part of the original context but you introduce it by accepting it as part of the context. The distinction between presupposition and entailment is in terms of negation. That’s presupposition can hold when you negate the original context. Eg kofi managed to stop the car