The sentence 'It does presuppose' is grammatically correct and is commonly used in written English.
You can use it when you wish to express that a certain action or statement assumes something beforehand. For example: "This course of action does presuppose that we have the resources to carry it out."
All this does presuppose you actually make it to hospital.
But such an easiness of movement in a flash does presuppose the most accomplished craftsmanship, it is the crystallized tradition in the Master's mind and body which explodes in lines and curves on paper, the most rigorous practice and discipline culminating into the freedom of improvisation.
Still, that does presuppose that you can actually play the goddamn things in the first place.
The direct acquaintance theorist does presuppose the intelligibility of a world that has "structure" independent of any structure imposed by the mind.
We did presuppose that blood which goes through the capillaries of ovarian tissue will be removed from these capillaries more effectively in vivo than in vitro.
For example, number theory per se presupposes the existence of numbers, and perhaps numerical functions and numerical properties, but it does not presuppose the existence of mathematical notation and it a fortiori does not presuppose the existence of the vast, intricate notational system that we call the language of number theory.
The problem with this line of argument, I think, is that even if it doesn't presuppose motive on the part of Band Aid's organisers, it narrows down Band Aid down to being a phenomenon controlled by them: here comes the leader to dispense his paternalistic solution from on high.
But the argument can be developed in such a way that it does not presuppose the falsity of PII.
It does not presuppose the kind of 'homogeneity' or thick collective identity that is widely held to be needed for comprehensive resource allocation, redistribution and goal attainment.
How can one conceive a new, advanced image of man if it does not presuppose the fact that death should be understood as merely an unpleasant affair that needs to be eliminated?
