Keelefilosoofia raamat
meaning that whoever committed this terrible crime is insane. Donnellan
has no quarrel with Russell here; this is what he calls the attributive use of
the description.
But suppose instead that we have not seen the body and have no other
direct knowledge of the matter; Jones has been arrested and charged with
the crime and we are attending his trial. The prosecution's case is excellent,
and we are privately presuming that Jones is guilty; also, he is rolling his eyes
and drooling in a homicidal manner. Here too I say to you (12), "Smith's
murderer is insane." In the context I am only using the description "Smith's
murderer" to refer to the person we are looking at, the defendant, regardless
of what attributes he has. Moreover, what I said is true if and only if the
defendant is insane, regardless of his having committed the murder. This is
what Donnellan calls the referential use.
Donnellan's objection to the Theory of Descriptions is just that the theory
annaabi.ee 
