Talk:Pathetic fallacy

This is also known as an "intentional stance," a term coined by the philopher Daniel Dennett. See http://www.psych.ualberta.ca/~mike/Pearl_Street/Dictionary/contents/I/intentional_stance.html . Also, there is no link to Anthropomorphism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropomorphism) even though it links here. Nick

Bad example

The article has "The Israeli people owe it to the Palestinian people" as an example of a pathetic fallacy. No, bad example. If "Israel" had been used instead of "Israeli people" then maybe. But a people can have and often does have a distinguishable (average) intentional stance, or feeling on an issue. Example removed. Paul Beardsell 03:50, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Questionable para

The pathetic fallacy with groups of people may overlap with the group attribution error: assuming most group behavior such as that of a disparate body such as a country is mostly situational, and it is difficult for such an entity to have any coherent disposition.

The above para suffers from the pathetic fallacy. A country does not have "group behaviour": A country's people (sometimes) has that. And, once again, a group can have a joint feeling (=pathos). Para removed from article.

Paul Beardsell 04:01, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

What does "coincide" mean here?

I find this without clear meaning: Other literary uses for pathetic fallacy would be having a certain character exclaim a fact or opinion which coincides in some way to that character, yet they are unaware of it. And when it is explained to me I think I may fail to see how it is an example of a pathetic fallacy? Paul Beardsell 04:07, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

POV

I think what the author fails to realize here is that all the examples here are metaphorical. Critical 02:14, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)