 The breakthrough came with his Theory of Definite Descriptions (1905). Phrases such as “the present King of France” are incomplete symbols, which can function meaningfully in the context of a sentence even though there may be nothing that they mean. They are incomplete because they have no meaning when taken in isolation and in the context of a sentence can be analyzed away. When “the King of France is bald” is analyzed in accordance with Russell’s formula—“There is something which is King of France such that if anything is King of France, it is identical with that thing, and that thing is bald”—the phrase “the King of France” simply disappears, though we are left with the predicate “is King of France”. “The King of France is bald”, is false because there is no King of France—nothing which satisfies the propositional function being king of France—and there is no need to suppose that the King of France must have some kind of being in order for this proposition to make sense.