1. “In the referential use of a definite
description we may succeed in picking out a person or thing to ask a question
about even though he or it does not really fit the description; but in the
attributive use if nothing fits the description, no straight forward answer to
the question can be given.” (Donnellan 287)
2. That the way a definite description is used
determines whether the sentence can thought to achieve its original purpose. In
the referential use of a sentence, the description is not as essential in
determining whether a particular object is the one meant by the speaker, as
long as there is a shared spatial-temporal context. Whereas, in the latter the description
is essential in determining the object; if no object fits the description, then
no definite answer regarding the object can be given. This view expands Russell’s
theory because a sentence can be false within his theory of descriptions, yet
still be used in such a way that it succeeds in its original intent.
3. If a description should be proven wholly untrue,
in the sense that even all presuppositions of appearance could be falsified,
then I do not think that any object could be picked out; so in some sense, there
are hidden or implicit assumptions that are proven true even when the explicit
description should be proven false.
I think your objection clarifies Donnellan's account here. As I understand, your objection as providing an account under which a expression may have a completely mistaken description , for which noting fits that description. Yet, there are chance that such description can indeed refers to something while the whole description is wholly misleading. considering the case, here is a near-sighted and color blind person, and he points to and describes a red book as a blue square. Knowing the fact that this person is somewhat visually disabled, people may have a grasp of what he what's to refer to by his description. Here Donnellan's belief of the referential use of definite description may have played a important role here, in which the misleading (completely wrong) description does not obscure the referred object by taking the speaker's intention into account.
ReplyDelete