Hmm. If “the wife of John” is the null set, it seems false, rather than meaningless, to predicate “red hair” on the null set.
But “the wife of John” doesn’t denote the null set. It denotes the unique member of the null set. I’m sticking with “meaningless”.
By your reasoning what’s the status of
“all wives of John have red hair”
“a wife of John has red hair”
Assuming John remains unmarried, 1 is true and 2 is false. But, “the youngest wife of John” fails to denote, and the claim that this nonexistent entity has red hair is meaningless. That is my story, and I’m sticking to it.
Hmm. If “the wife of John” is the null set, it seems false, rather than meaningless, to predicate “red hair” on the null set.
But “the wife of John” doesn’t denote the null set. It denotes the unique member of the null set. I’m sticking with “meaningless”.
By your reasoning what’s the status of
“all wives of John have red hair”
“a wife of John has red hair”
Assuming John remains unmarried, 1 is true and 2 is false. But, “the youngest wife of John” fails to denote, and the claim that this nonexistent entity has red hair is meaningless. That is my story, and I’m sticking to it.