pathetic fallacy
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
English
[edit]
Etymology
[edit]Coined by British cultural critic John Ruskin in 1856 in his work Modern Painters. Here, fallacy does not refer to a logical fallacy, but should be understood as “a falsehood, something that is untrue”, while pathetic here means “caused by an excited state of the feelings”;[1] thus, "emotional misrepresentation", not "contemptible illogic".
Noun
[edit]| Examples |
|---|
pathetic fallacy (plural pathetic fallacies)
- A metaphor which consists in treating inanimate objects or concepts as if they were human beings, for instance having thoughts or feelings.
- 1856, John Ruskin, chapter XII, in Modern Painters […], volume III, London: Smith, Elder and Co., […], →OCLC, part IV (Of Many Things), § 2, page 184:
- Taking, therefore, this wide field, it is surely a very notable circumstance, to begin with, that this pathetic fallacy is eminently characteristic of modern painting. For instance, Keats, describing a wave, breaking, out at sea, says of it
Down whose green back the short-lived foam, all hoar,
Bursts gradual, with a wayward indolence.
- 2022 June 14, Ian Bogost, “Google’s ‘Sentient’ Chatbot Is Our Self-Deceiving Future”, in The Atlantic[1]:
- The next generation of AI will put the pathetic fallacy on steroids.
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ John Ruskin (1856) “Chapter XII. Of the Pathetic Fallacy”, in Modern Painters, volume III (part IV), § 5, page 170: “[I]t is the fallacy of wilful fancy, which involves no real expectation that it will be believed; or else it is a fallacy caused by an excited state of the feelings, making us, for the time, more or less irrational.”