Word for attaching blame to inanimate objects
In a recent court case in Darlington, a man was convicted of destroying a door with a machete. He was sentenced to some trifling inconvenience, but the magistrates were careful to order the destruction of the machete; clearly they have identified the real culprit, and have ensured no further offences will be possible.
The same thought processes were embedded in English law up to 1846 in the notion of the deodand, some object that caused a death and was therefore forfeit to the Crown.
The fellow who tripped over his shoelace and destroyed some crockery was quick to blame his shoelace; having just converted Ming vases worth £500,000 to fragments worth £diddly he was probably rather shocked and thinking in an instinctive way.
This thought process is sufficiently old and common to have a name. Does anyone know what it is? (I don't think animism quite covers it.)
single-word-requests
asked Feb 21 '13 at 12:47
Brian HooperBrian Hooper
29.1k45130233
|
show 1 more comment
In a recent court case in Darlington, a man was convicted of destroying a door with a machete. He was sentenced to some trifling inconvenience, but the magistrates were careful to order the destruction of the machete; clearly they have identified the real culprit, and have ensured no further offences will be possible.
The same thought processes were embedded in English law up to 1846 in the notion of the deodand, some object that caused a death and was therefore forfeit to the Crown.
The fellow who tripped over his shoelace and destroyed some crockery was quick to blame his shoelace; having just converted Ming vases worth £500,000 to fragments worth £diddly he was probably rather shocked and thinking in an instinctive way.
This thought process is sufficiently old and common to have a name. Does anyone know what it is? (I don't think animism quite covers it.)
single-word-requests
asked Feb 21 '13 at 12:47
Brian HooperBrian Hooper
29.1k45130233
3
Animism certainly doesn't cover deodand, though deodand didn't necessarily blame the object, so much as hold it to be cursed as an effect of the death, rather than the cause, and later to act as a sort of negligence fine. Animism could involve holding something actively to blame, but it's much wider than that. Not knowing of a word, I might well be tempted to stretch deodand into figurative service.
– Jon Hanna
Feb 21 '13 at 13:02
2
Deodand is so clearly what you need that it would be worth attempting to revive the term (C S Forester related it to the Nuremberg Trials in one of the stories in The Nightmare). But the real question is; why did the door have a machete in the first place?
– TimLymington
Feb 21 '13 at 18:29
@TimLymington Deodands are certainly cool. “Deodands are humanoids which look like handsome, muscular human men, but with "dead black lustreless skin and long slit eyes." They are strong, murderous, and carnivorous creatures, but can be killed with offensive spells, which they fear.”
– tchrist♦
Feb 21 '13 at 21:44
The phenomenon reappears.
– Brian Hooper
Dec 26 '16 at 10:04
The formal psychological term for this is 'ascribing agency'. There have been lots of experiments showing that humans and many animals will consider an object to be 'pruposeful' if it moves a certain way.
– Mitch
12 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
In a recent court case in Darlington, a man was convicted of destroying a door with a machete. He was sentenced to some trifling inconvenience, but the magistrates were careful to order the destruction of the machete; clearly they have identified the real culprit, and have ensured no further offences will be possible.
The same thought processes were embedded in English law up to 1846 in the notion of the deodand, some object that caused a death and was therefore forfeit to the Crown.
The fellow who tripped over his shoelace and destroyed some crockery was quick to blame his shoelace; having just converted Ming vases worth £500,000 to fragments worth £diddly he was probably rather shocked and thinking in an instinctive way.
This thought process is sufficiently old and common to have a name. Does anyone know what it is? (I don't think animism quite covers it.)
single-word-requests
asked Feb 21 '13 at 12:47
Brian HooperBrian Hooper
29.1k45130233
In a recent court case in Darlington, a man was convicted of destroying a door with a machete. He was sentenced to some trifling inconvenience, but the magistrates were careful to order the destruction of the machete; clearly they have identified the real culprit, and have ensured no further offences will be possible.
The same thought processes were embedded in English law up to 1846 in the notion of the deodand, some object that caused a death and was therefore forfeit to the Crown.
The fellow who tripped over his shoelace and destroyed some crockery was quick to blame his shoelace; having just converted Ming vases worth £500,000 to fragments worth £diddly he was probably rather shocked and thinking in an instinctive way.
This thought process is sufficiently old and common to have a name. Does anyone know what it is? (I don't think animism quite covers it.)
single-word-requests
single-word-requests
asked Feb 21 '13 at 12:47
Brian HooperBrian Hooper
29.1k45130233
asked Feb 21 '13 at 12:47
Brian HooperBrian Hooper
29.1k45130233
asked Feb 21 '13 at 12:47
Brian HooperBrian Hooper
29.1k45130233
asked Feb 21 '13 at 12:47
Brian HooperBrian Hooper
29.1k45130233
asked Feb 21 '13 at 12:47
Brian HooperBrian Hooper
29.1k45130233
29.1k45130233
3
Animism certainly doesn't cover deodand, though deodand didn't necessarily blame the object, so much as hold it to be cursed as an effect of the death, rather than the cause, and later to act as a sort of negligence fine. Animism could involve holding something actively to blame, but it's much wider than that. Not knowing of a word, I might well be tempted to stretch deodand into figurative service.
– Jon Hanna
Feb 21 '13 at 13:02
2
Deodand is so clearly what you need that it would be worth attempting to revive the term (C S Forester related it to the Nuremberg Trials in one of the stories in The Nightmare). But the real question is; why did the door have a machete in the first place?
– TimLymington
Feb 21 '13 at 18:29
@TimLymington Deodands are certainly cool. “Deodands are humanoids which look like handsome, muscular human men, but with "dead black lustreless skin and long slit eyes." They are strong, murderous, and carnivorous creatures, but can be killed with offensive spells, which they fear.”
– tchrist♦
Feb 21 '13 at 21:44
The phenomenon reappears.
– Brian Hooper
Dec 26 '16 at 10:04
The formal psychological term for this is 'ascribing agency'. There have been lots of experiments showing that humans and many animals will consider an object to be 'pruposeful' if it moves a certain way.
– Mitch
12 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
3
Animism certainly doesn't cover deodand, though deodand didn't necessarily blame the object, so much as hold it to be cursed as an effect of the death, rather than the cause, and later to act as a sort of negligence fine. Animism could involve holding something actively to blame, but it's much wider than that. Not knowing of a word, I might well be tempted to stretch deodand into figurative service.
– Jon Hanna
Feb 21 '13 at 13:02
2
Deodand is so clearly what you need that it would be worth attempting to revive the term (C S Forester related it to the Nuremberg Trials in one of the stories in The Nightmare). But the real question is; why did the door have a machete in the first place?
– TimLymington
Feb 21 '13 at 18:29
@TimLymington Deodands are certainly cool. “Deodands are humanoids which look like handsome, muscular human men, but with "dead black lustreless skin and long slit eyes." They are strong, murderous, and carnivorous creatures, but can be killed with offensive spells, which they fear.”
– tchrist♦
Feb 21 '13 at 21:44
The phenomenon reappears.
– Brian Hooper
Dec 26 '16 at 10:04
The formal psychological term for this is 'ascribing agency'. There have been lots of experiments showing that humans and many animals will consider an object to be 'pruposeful' if it moves a certain way.
– Mitch
12 hours ago
3
3
Animism certainly doesn't cover deodand, though deodand didn't necessarily blame the object, so much as hold it to be cursed as an effect of the death, rather than the cause, and later to act as a sort of negligence fine. Animism could involve holding something actively to blame, but it's much wider than that. Not knowing of a word, I might well be tempted to stretch deodand into figurative service.
– Jon Hanna
Feb 21 '13 at 13:02
Animism certainly doesn't cover deodand, though deodand didn't necessarily blame the object, so much as hold it to be cursed as an effect of the death, rather than the cause, and later to act as a sort of negligence fine. Animism could involve holding something actively to blame, but it's much wider than that. Not knowing of a word, I might well be tempted to stretch deodand into figurative service.
– Jon Hanna
Feb 21 '13 at 13:02
2
2
Deodand is so clearly what you need that it would be worth attempting to revive the term (C S Forester related it to the Nuremberg Trials in one of the stories in The Nightmare). But the real question is; why did the door have a machete in the first place?
– TimLymington
Feb 21 '13 at 18:29
Deodand is so clearly what you need that it would be worth attempting to revive the term (C S Forester related it to the Nuremberg Trials in one of the stories in The Nightmare). But the real question is; why did the door have a machete in the first place?
– TimLymington
Feb 21 '13 at 18:29
@TimLymington Deodands are certainly cool. “Deodands are humanoids which look like handsome, muscular human men, but with "dead black lustreless skin and long slit eyes." They are strong, murderous, and carnivorous creatures, but can be killed with offensive spells, which they fear.”
– tchrist♦
Feb 21 '13 at 21:44
@TimLymington Deodands are certainly cool. “Deodands are humanoids which look like handsome, muscular human men, but with "dead black lustreless skin and long slit eyes." They are strong, murderous, and carnivorous creatures, but can be killed with offensive spells, which they fear.”
– tchrist♦
Feb 21 '13 at 21:44
The phenomenon reappears.
– Brian Hooper
Dec 26 '16 at 10:04
The phenomenon reappears.
– Brian Hooper
Dec 26 '16 at 10:04
The formal psychological term for this is 'ascribing agency'. There have been lots of experiments showing that humans and many animals will consider an object to be 'pruposeful' if it moves a certain way.
– Mitch
12 hours ago
The formal psychological term for this is 'ascribing agency'. There have been lots of experiments showing that humans and many animals will consider an object to be 'pruposeful' if it moves a certain way.
– Mitch
12 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
The pathetic fallacy is:
the treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or sensations
answered Feb 21 '13 at 20:22
donothingsuccessfullydonothingsuccessfully
2,4291113
+1 for the link. I am grateful for the enlightenment. The Tennyson poem (Crossing the Bar) made me cry. :-)
– Kristina Lopez
Feb 21 '13 at 20:34
add a comment |
"Scapegoating" - though usually assigned to a person, can certainly be assigned to an inanimate object. The point is that the blame is passed onto someone/something other than the true perpetrator.
Definition of "scapegoat" from The Free Dictionary.com:
- One that is made to bear the blame of others.
- Bible - A live goat over whose head Aaron confessed all the sins of the children of Israel on the Day of Atonement. The goat, symbolically bearing their sins, was then sent into the wilderness.
tr.v. scape·goat·ed, scape·goat·ing, scape·goats
To make a scapegoat of.
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:42
Kristina LopezKristina Lopez
25.7k648104
add a comment |
I think the closest one can get is anthropomorphism
the attribution of human characteristics or behaviour to a god, animal or object.
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:03
Matt E. Эллен♦Matt E. Эллен
25.4k1488153
...or personification.
– Mitch
Feb 21 '13 at 21:42
I am guilty of such ... daily!!!
– lbf
Feb 22 '18 at 16:34
add a comment |
The phrase "whipping [or lashing or flogging] the Hellespont" alludes to a classic instance of the behavior described in the OP's question. The Wikipedia entry on Xerxes summarizes the story:
According to the Greek historian Herodotus, Xerxes's first attempt to bridge the Hellespont [as part of an attempted invasion of Greece] ended in failure when a storm destroyed the flax and papyrus cables of the bridges. In retaliation Xerxes ordered the Hellespont (the strait itself) whipped three hundred times and had fetters thrown into the water.
Wikipedia's Xerxes article includes an illustration (from 1909) depicting the punishment of the waterway.
answered Aug 2 '14 at 17:58
Sven YargsSven Yargs
115k20249507
add a comment |
Resistentialism, according to Wikipedia:
Resistentialism is a jocular theory to describe "seemingly spiteful behavior manifested by inanimate objects
edited 12 hours ago
JJJ
6,21392646
answered 13 hours ago
Patrick LaddPatrick Ladd
311
New contributor
Patrick Ladd is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f104807%2fword-for-attaching-blame-to-inanimate-objects%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The pathetic fallacy is:
the treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or sensations
answered Feb 21 '13 at 20:22
donothingsuccessfullydonothingsuccessfully
2,4291113
+1 for the link. I am grateful for the enlightenment. The Tennyson poem (Crossing the Bar) made me cry. :-)
– Kristina Lopez
Feb 21 '13 at 20:34
add a comment |
The pathetic fallacy is:
the treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or sensations
answered Feb 21 '13 at 20:22
donothingsuccessfullydonothingsuccessfully
2,4291113
+1 for the link. I am grateful for the enlightenment. The Tennyson poem (Crossing the Bar) made me cry. :-)
– Kristina Lopez
Feb 21 '13 at 20:34
add a comment |
The pathetic fallacy is:
the treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or sensations
answered Feb 21 '13 at 20:22
donothingsuccessfullydonothingsuccessfully
2,4291113
The pathetic fallacy is:
the treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or sensations
answered Feb 21 '13 at 20:22
donothingsuccessfullydonothingsuccessfully
2,4291113
answered Feb 21 '13 at 20:22
donothingsuccessfullydonothingsuccessfully
2,4291113
answered Feb 21 '13 at 20:22
donothingsuccessfullydonothingsuccessfully
2,4291113
answered Feb 21 '13 at 20:22
donothingsuccessfullydonothingsuccessfully
2,4291113
2,4291113
+1 for the link. I am grateful for the enlightenment. The Tennyson poem (Crossing the Bar) made me cry. :-)
– Kristina Lopez
Feb 21 '13 at 20:34
add a comment |
+1 for the link. I am grateful for the enlightenment. The Tennyson poem (Crossing the Bar) made me cry. :-)
– Kristina Lopez
Feb 21 '13 at 20:34
+1 for the link. I am grateful for the enlightenment. The Tennyson poem (Crossing the Bar) made me cry. :-)
– Kristina Lopez
Feb 21 '13 at 20:34
+1 for the link. I am grateful for the enlightenment. The Tennyson poem (Crossing the Bar) made me cry. :-)
– Kristina Lopez
Feb 21 '13 at 20:34
add a comment |
"Scapegoating" - though usually assigned to a person, can certainly be assigned to an inanimate object. The point is that the blame is passed onto someone/something other than the true perpetrator.
Definition of "scapegoat" from The Free Dictionary.com:
- One that is made to bear the blame of others.
- Bible - A live goat over whose head Aaron confessed all the sins of the children of Israel on the Day of Atonement. The goat, symbolically bearing their sins, was then sent into the wilderness.
tr.v. scape·goat·ed, scape·goat·ing, scape·goats
To make a scapegoat of.
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:42
Kristina LopezKristina Lopez
25.7k648104
add a comment |
"Scapegoating" - though usually assigned to a person, can certainly be assigned to an inanimate object. The point is that the blame is passed onto someone/something other than the true perpetrator.
Definition of "scapegoat" from The Free Dictionary.com:
- One that is made to bear the blame of others.
- Bible - A live goat over whose head Aaron confessed all the sins of the children of Israel on the Day of Atonement. The goat, symbolically bearing their sins, was then sent into the wilderness.
tr.v. scape·goat·ed, scape·goat·ing, scape·goats
To make a scapegoat of.
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:42
Kristina LopezKristina Lopez
25.7k648104
add a comment |
"Scapegoating" - though usually assigned to a person, can certainly be assigned to an inanimate object. The point is that the blame is passed onto someone/something other than the true perpetrator.
Definition of "scapegoat" from The Free Dictionary.com:
- One that is made to bear the blame of others.
- Bible - A live goat over whose head Aaron confessed all the sins of the children of Israel on the Day of Atonement. The goat, symbolically bearing their sins, was then sent into the wilderness.
tr.v. scape·goat·ed, scape·goat·ing, scape·goats
To make a scapegoat of.
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:42
Kristina LopezKristina Lopez
25.7k648104
"Scapegoating" - though usually assigned to a person, can certainly be assigned to an inanimate object. The point is that the blame is passed onto someone/something other than the true perpetrator.
Definition of "scapegoat" from The Free Dictionary.com:
- One that is made to bear the blame of others.
- Bible - A live goat over whose head Aaron confessed all the sins of the children of Israel on the Day of Atonement. The goat, symbolically bearing their sins, was then sent into the wilderness.
tr.v. scape·goat·ed, scape·goat·ing, scape·goats
To make a scapegoat of.
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:42
Kristina LopezKristina Lopez
25.7k648104
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:42
Kristina LopezKristina Lopez
25.7k648104
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:42
Kristina LopezKristina Lopez
25.7k648104
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:42
Kristina LopezKristina Lopez
25.7k648104
25.7k648104
add a comment |
add a comment |
I think the closest one can get is anthropomorphism
the attribution of human characteristics or behaviour to a god, animal or object.
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:03
Matt E. Эллен♦Matt E. Эллен
25.4k1488153
...or personification.
– Mitch
Feb 21 '13 at 21:42
I am guilty of such ... daily!!!
– lbf
Feb 22 '18 at 16:34
add a comment |
I think the closest one can get is anthropomorphism
the attribution of human characteristics or behaviour to a god, animal or object.
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:03
Matt E. Эллен♦Matt E. Эллен
25.4k1488153
...or personification.
– Mitch
Feb 21 '13 at 21:42
I am guilty of such ... daily!!!
– lbf
Feb 22 '18 at 16:34
add a comment |
I think the closest one can get is anthropomorphism
the attribution of human characteristics or behaviour to a god, animal or object.
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:03
Matt E. Эллен♦Matt E. Эллен
25.4k1488153
I think the closest one can get is anthropomorphism
the attribution of human characteristics or behaviour to a god, animal or object.
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:03
Matt E. Эллен♦Matt E. Эллен
25.4k1488153
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:03
Matt E. Эллен♦Matt E. Эллен
25.4k1488153
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:03
Matt E. Эллен♦Matt E. Эллен
25.4k1488153
answered Feb 21 '13 at 14:03
Matt E. Эллен♦Matt E. Эллен
25.4k1488153
25.4k1488153
...or personification.
– Mitch
Feb 21 '13 at 21:42
I am guilty of such ... daily!!!
– lbf
Feb 22 '18 at 16:34
add a comment |
...or personification.
– Mitch
Feb 21 '13 at 21:42
I am guilty of such ... daily!!!
– lbf
Feb 22 '18 at 16:34
...or personification.
– Mitch
Feb 21 '13 at 21:42
...or personification.
– Mitch
Feb 21 '13 at 21:42
I am guilty of such ... daily!!!
– lbf
Feb 22 '18 at 16:34
I am guilty of such ... daily!!!
– lbf
Feb 22 '18 at 16:34
add a comment |
The phrase "whipping [or lashing or flogging] the Hellespont" alludes to a classic instance of the behavior described in the OP's question. The Wikipedia entry on Xerxes summarizes the story:
According to the Greek historian Herodotus, Xerxes's first attempt to bridge the Hellespont [as part of an attempted invasion of Greece] ended in failure when a storm destroyed the flax and papyrus cables of the bridges. In retaliation Xerxes ordered the Hellespont (the strait itself) whipped three hundred times and had fetters thrown into the water.
Wikipedia's Xerxes article includes an illustration (from 1909) depicting the punishment of the waterway.
answered Aug 2 '14 at 17:58
Sven YargsSven Yargs
115k20249507
add a comment |
The phrase "whipping [or lashing or flogging] the Hellespont" alludes to a classic instance of the behavior described in the OP's question. The Wikipedia entry on Xerxes summarizes the story:
According to the Greek historian Herodotus, Xerxes's first attempt to bridge the Hellespont [as part of an attempted invasion of Greece] ended in failure when a storm destroyed the flax and papyrus cables of the bridges. In retaliation Xerxes ordered the Hellespont (the strait itself) whipped three hundred times and had fetters thrown into the water.
Wikipedia's Xerxes article includes an illustration (from 1909) depicting the punishment of the waterway.
answered Aug 2 '14 at 17:58
Sven YargsSven Yargs
115k20249507
add a comment |
The phrase "whipping [or lashing or flogging] the Hellespont" alludes to a classic instance of the behavior described in the OP's question. The Wikipedia entry on Xerxes summarizes the story:
According to the Greek historian Herodotus, Xerxes's first attempt to bridge the Hellespont [as part of an attempted invasion of Greece] ended in failure when a storm destroyed the flax and papyrus cables of the bridges. In retaliation Xerxes ordered the Hellespont (the strait itself) whipped three hundred times and had fetters thrown into the water.
Wikipedia's Xerxes article includes an illustration (from 1909) depicting the punishment of the waterway.
answered Aug 2 '14 at 17:58
Sven YargsSven Yargs
115k20249507
The phrase "whipping [or lashing or flogging] the Hellespont" alludes to a classic instance of the behavior described in the OP's question. The Wikipedia entry on Xerxes summarizes the story:
According to the Greek historian Herodotus, Xerxes's first attempt to bridge the Hellespont [as part of an attempted invasion of Greece] ended in failure when a storm destroyed the flax and papyrus cables of the bridges. In retaliation Xerxes ordered the Hellespont (the strait itself) whipped three hundred times and had fetters thrown into the water.
Wikipedia's Xerxes article includes an illustration (from 1909) depicting the punishment of the waterway.
answered Aug 2 '14 at 17:58
Sven YargsSven Yargs
115k20249507
answered Aug 2 '14 at 17:58
Sven YargsSven Yargs
115k20249507
answered Aug 2 '14 at 17:58
Sven YargsSven Yargs
115k20249507
answered Aug 2 '14 at 17:58
Sven YargsSven Yargs
115k20249507
115k20249507
add a comment |
add a comment |
Resistentialism, according to Wikipedia:
Resistentialism is a jocular theory to describe "seemingly spiteful behavior manifested by inanimate objects
edited 12 hours ago
JJJ
6,21392646
answered 13 hours ago
Patrick LaddPatrick Ladd
311
New contributor
Patrick Ladd is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Resistentialism, according to Wikipedia:
Resistentialism is a jocular theory to describe "seemingly spiteful behavior manifested by inanimate objects
edited 12 hours ago
JJJ
6,21392646
answered 13 hours ago
Patrick LaddPatrick Ladd
311
New contributor
Patrick Ladd is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Resistentialism, according to Wikipedia:
Resistentialism is a jocular theory to describe "seemingly spiteful behavior manifested by inanimate objects
edited 12 hours ago
JJJ
6,21392646
answered 13 hours ago
Patrick LaddPatrick Ladd
311
New contributor
Patrick Ladd is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Resistentialism, according to Wikipedia:
Resistentialism is a jocular theory to describe "seemingly spiteful behavior manifested by inanimate objects
edited 12 hours ago
JJJ
6,21392646
answered 13 hours ago
Patrick LaddPatrick Ladd
311
New contributor
Patrick Ladd is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 12 hours ago
JJJ
6,21392646
edited 12 hours ago
JJJ
6,21392646
edited 12 hours ago
JJJ
6,21392646
6,21392646
answered 13 hours ago
Patrick LaddPatrick Ladd
311
New contributor
Patrick Ladd is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 13 hours ago
Patrick LaddPatrick Ladd
311
answered 13 hours ago
Patrick LaddPatrick Ladd
311
311
New contributor
Patrick Ladd is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Patrick Ladd is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Patrick Ladd is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f104807%2fword-for-attaching-blame-to-inanimate-objects%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
Animism certainly doesn't cover deodand, though deodand didn't necessarily blame the object, so much as hold it to be cursed as an effect of the death, rather than the cause, and later to act as a sort of negligence fine. Animism could involve holding something actively to blame, but it's much wider than that. Not knowing of a word, I might well be tempted to stretch deodand into figurative service.
– Jon Hanna
Feb 21 '13 at 13:02
2
Deodand is so clearly what you need that it would be worth attempting to revive the term (C S Forester related it to the Nuremberg Trials in one of the stories in The Nightmare). But the real question is; why did the door have a machete in the first place?
– TimLymington
Feb 21 '13 at 18:29
@TimLymington Deodands are certainly cool. “Deodands are humanoids which look like handsome, muscular human men, but with "dead black lustreless skin and long slit eyes." They are strong, murderous, and carnivorous creatures, but can be killed with offensive spells, which they fear.”
– tchrist♦
Feb 21 '13 at 21:44
The phenomenon reappears.
– Brian Hooper
Dec 26 '16 at 10:04
The formal psychological term for this is 'ascribing agency'. There have been lots of experiments showing that humans and many animals will consider an object to be 'pruposeful' if it moves a certain way.
– Mitch
12 hours ago