1. Identify the following as a proposition or a propositional function by writing p or pf next to the expression”
(a) x is sick = pf
(b) the first man on the moon = p
(c) oh to be free = p
(d) ‘x is human for all values of x = pf
(e) Somebody stole my camera = pf
(e) Eat dirt = p
2. (i) State a difficulty that arises about the interpretation of some sentence containing an expression such as: “everything,” “something,” or “nothing.” A difficulty interpreting using an absolute expression such as: “everything,” “something,” or “nothing.” to denote an element in a description is that the terms cannot be taken out of context and remain true. In order for an expression to be true, it need to be able to be proven. If a statement can be disproved even once it should be discounted using a term such as “everything,” “something,” or “nothing” leaves it open for a constant need to be defended
(ii) Show how Russell would analyze that statement. Russell would have argued that a phrase containing a denoting absolute like everything, something was part of the category of all and could not have a meaning outside its context.
3. Explain Russell’s argument that “a man” does not refer to anything. Russell defends his argument by restating his argument by substituting white for the word man and finds it is not possible to defend such a statement. He brings this further into focus by asserting that this down pays the meaning of the word man as a nebulas and uncertain word and therefore it is not possible to assert a meaning with context using it. In this, he prefers to solidify meanings by the usage of proper names.
(ii) Show how Russell would analyze that statement. Russell would break down that statement containing that indefinite description of the word man to determine if it is defensible when taken out of context. If each statement cannot stand on is own He would discount the assertion. “A sentence that is not valid out of context” would break down to:
There is a sentence. It is one specific and unique sentence. It is not valid out of context.
4. Treat a sentence involving a definite description on the pattern of question 2 — with (i), (i), and (iii). Cardinals are red birds. There is a species of bird called a cardinal. There is only one species of bird called a cardinal. All birds of that one species are red.
5. Treat an identity sentence likewise. John Smith has brown eyes. There is a man called John Smith. There is only one man called John Smith. The man called John Smith has brown eyes.
6. Strawson thinks that Russell buys into certain of the important principles of the arguments that he (Russell) is trying to defeat. Explain what these principles are and why Russell’s theory of denoting would seem to accept them. Russell’s paradox is that true form is abstract and hard to grasp because a true set is the set of all sets that are not members of themselves. The paradox arises is if the set of all true sets is a member of itself and therefore not a true set. Russell brought mathematics out as philosophical argument. In doing so he spurred further work in logic. This led to the development of metalogic. It also effected analytic philosophy, epistemology and metaphysics. Anglo-American philosophers used this to try to justify each step of their processes and this has much of the further thought patterns. It also has limitations and Strawson focused on those when delving into Russell’s work. Part of this is that there are some truths that cannot be mathematically defined. By attempting to reduce everything to mathematic principals Strawson felt Russell was attempting to force inappropriate distinctions into place where those distinctions could not be made. In order to do this he needed to accept thoughts an distinctions as foundation proofs when they could not be seen as true sets by Russell’s own logical definitions.
7. Illustrate and explain Strawson’s distinction between a sentence, the use of a sentence, and the utterance of a sentence as well as that between an expression, the use of an expression and the utterance of an expression. Strawson argues that a denoting phase that does not denote a specific individual fails as a definitive description. He creates a logical delineation between the logical and grammatical subjects in a sentence, along with the sentence’s use and categorizes them as sentences, expressions and utterances.
8. What lesson is to be taken form this distinction? The properties that are properties of the use of sentences or expressions versus of the sentences and expressions exist when those statements are taken out of context. The use of sentences defines their purpose. The sentences and expressions defines their content and validity.
9. Strawson argues that, contrary to what Russell says, a phrase from 'the so and so' does not strictly imply uniqueness. Strawson opposes Russell’s acceptance of contextual statements and argues against situations where one statement builds upon the context rather than its ability to stand as true on its own. This calls for a strict adherence to what is immediately at hand. The statement that a phrase from “the so and so” does not fit this description.
Works Cited
