So let us focus on concept, in this discussion, to find the starting block of theory. Let us start with a very simple one: light. In layman’s language, light enables man with a normal eye to see. Technically it is “electromagnetic radiation that can be detected by the human eye.”  Its speed in a vacuum is 299,792 kilometers per second; this speed does not change. Nothing can travel faster than light (Encyclopedia Britannica 2009).

Light as a concept is given a definite description as follows: Light is an electromagnetic radiation that travels  at a constant rate of 299,792 kilometers per second in a vacuum.   

Verification of a definite description

Concept takes the form of definite description. Verification of a definite description provides a way to check if a concept is erroneous or fictitious. This way a fictitious concept is avoided. A statement claimed to be a theory with erroneous or fictitious (meaningless) concepts is false.

The above schema is adopted from the theory of definite description (in logic) of Bertrand Russell, Nobel Prize winner for literature (philosophy) in 1950. Russell says that existence is asserted on a definite description and not on a name.

“The basic contention of Russell’s theory of descriptions is that a proposition containing a definite description is not to be regarded as an assertion about an object of which that description is a name but rather as an existentially quantified assertion that a certain (rather complex) property has an instance” (Encyclopedia Britannica 2008).

To make things simpler let “Bonaparte” be a name and let “the military general member of a tripartite appointed to reign over the French revolution” a definite description. “Bonaparte” has several instances or extensions like Joseph Bonaparte and Napoleon Bonaparte whereas “the military general member of a tripartite appointed to reign over the French revolution” has only one instance. This definite description has an unambiguous verifier. A definite description without a verifier is meaningless, like “a four-legged animal weighing one ton that flies.”

The name Bonaparte is not verifiable.  A testimony by a person that somebody is called Bonaparte will not serve the purpose for he can give a false testimony. A birth certificate or identification card will not serve the purpose either for these can be manufactured to one’s desire. A logical analysis of “Bonaparte exists” leads to a contradiction, according to Russell.

Usual practice

The usual practice of defining concepts in scientific research is prone to lead to erroneous or fictitious concepts. In the deductive form of definition inaccuracies and inventions can slip through.  Take: “A carabao is an animal with four legs that can fly. “Animal” is the class, “carabao” is the subclass; “with four legs that can fly” is an invention. The definition is grammatically correct but it is here where most erros are committed. A grammatically correct definition does not mean that that which is defined is also real.

A place in philosophy of science

We are getting into the root of theory-making as a practice of man. Facts that are unnamed, or unindicated, or unlabeled, or undefined lay about him before he makes a sound or symbol to indicate any part of his body or any patch or leaf or stone around him. Any sound or symbol in his mind that he uses to indicate a thing is the start of a definition of fact. We say that concept is a constituent of a theory. Concept takes the form  of definite description like a noun phrase or a clause or a sentence. Russell gave “the present king of France” as an example. Examples of clauses, for light: (1) it has a speed of 99,792,458 metres per second, and (2) its speed is constant and the fastest in the universe.

“Definite description” the form taken by concept has a place in the philosophy of science.