These are suggestions only; you are not restricted to them.  But if you have a different topic you'd like to try, it would be a good idea to discuss it with me in advance.

    1.  In the handout "The Referential Theory," I gave that theory of meaning very short shrift.  Can more be said in its favor?  Can you come up with a version of the Referential theory that finesses the merely suggestive critical points I made?

    2.  Conduct your own assessment of Russell's Theory of Descriptions.  (i)  Is the Theory credible in its own right?  To what extent does the Theory correctly predict and explain the use of `the' in English?   Or, (ii) does the Theory in fact solve the Problem of Apparent Reference to Nonexistents, whether or not the solution is satisfactory?  Or, (iii) does it solve one or more of Russell's other four puzzles?   Or, (iv) granting that the Theory does solve one or more of the five puzzles, are Russell's solution(s) satisfactory, or are there more plausible solutions?   (I said "Or," "Or" and "Or" because, here as elsewhere, I'd prefer that you go into detail on a small number of points, rather than taking a larger number of superficial potshots.)
    Three sub-possibilities under option (i):  (a) Are there other uses of 'the' (I mentioned "The whale is a mammal") that Russell's theory simply does not fit?  How do you think he might try to handle them?  (b) What about Trevor's suggestion that sometimes a definite description is used simply to refer to a particular individual, regardless of whether that individual fits the description?  (Recall my example of "Smith's murderer," which is due to Keith Donnellan.)  (c) On p. 201 of "On Denoting," Russell says that our sentence S, “The [present] King of France is bald,"  is "plainly false."  Is it?  If not, why not, and what would be a better assessment?

    3.  Assess the Wittgensteinian Use theory as we have sketched it.  If you can, defend it against one or more of the objections stated in the handout, "Some Objections to a Simple "Use" Theory of Meaning."

    4.  Discuss and evaluate one or more of Strawson's Wittgensteinian objections to Russell's Theory of Descriptions (briefly stated in the handout, "A Few Words on Strawson on Russell."

    5.  Can a red/green color-blind person understand the word `red'?  Use theories seem to imply so.  Discuss pro and con.

    6.  When the second American edition of Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations appeared, his executor G.E.M. Anscombe frothed at the mouth and demanded that Macmillan recall all copies immediately.  A main reason for her demand was that the diagram in §48 was not printed in color  instead, each square was done in this manner:
                                                                         _____
                                                                        /_ red /

(I.e., if your browser doesn't display that correctly, each square in the diagram was black-and-white and had just a color word such as "red" inside it.)  Why should that have been so upsetting?  What is really the main point of §s 48 and 49?  And would Anscombe have been similarly upset with Student Stores for having produced monochrome copies for our course-pack?

    7.  Can you help out Hempel with the Formulation problem?

    8.  Can you defend the Verification theory against one or more of our other objections?