 These postulates look more difficult than they actually are. CL1 says that, if TC has a unique realization, then it is realized by the entities named by \(t_1,\ldots,t_k\). Realization of a theory TC, in this formulation, means interpretation of the descriptive terms under which TC comes out true, where the interpretation of the \(V_o\) terms is antecedently given. So, CL1 is to be read as saying that the theoretical terms are to be understood as designating those entities that uniquely realize TC, in the context of an antecedently given interpretation of the \(V_o\) terms. CL2 says that, if the Ramsey sentence is false, the theoretical terms do not designate anything. To see this, recall that \(\neg \exists x(x=t_i)\) means, in free logic, that \(t_i\) is denotationless. In case the theory TC has multiple realizations, the theoretical terms are denotationless too. This is expressed by CL3.