Paradox of Fiction (Glossary Entry)

The Paradox of Fiction crystallizes a fundamental tension in human psychology and philosophical aesthetics: how can rational individuals experience deep, authentic emotions—such as sorrow, dread, or elation—in response to characters and narratives they consciously know to be entirely fabricated and non-existent? This problem highlights a disjunction between our cognitive faculties (knowing something is not real) and our affective responses (feeling as if it were real).

Central to the paradox are three propositions, each seemingly true, yet mutually inconsistent when taken together:

1. We genuinely feel emotions towards fictional characters and situations.
2. We know that fictional characters and situations do not exist.
3. We can only genuinely feel emotions towards things we believe to be real.

Philosophers, from Colin Radford to Kendall Walton, have extensively debated which of these propositions must be rejected or reinterpreted to resolve the paradox. The implications extend beyond academic philosophy, touching upon our understanding of empathy, imagination, and the enduring power of art.

One might observe that the digital age, with its proliferation of 'deepfakes' and hyper-realistic virtual avatars, presents a contemporary echo of this paradox. As artificial constructs become increasingly indistinguishable from reality, our emotional responses to them, even if consciously recognized as unreal, demand renewed philosophical scrutiny. The old paradox of fiction subtly morphs into a new paradox of digital authenticity.

Some theories propose that we engage in a 'suspension of disbelief,' temporarily setting aside our knowledge of non-existence. Others, like Kendall Walton's 'make-believe theory,' suggest that our emotions are not genuine but 'quasi-emotions,' part of a larger imaginative game. Still, other accounts argue that the objects of our emotions are not the characters themselves, but rather our thoughts or imaginings about them, or that fictional works provide a safe space to explore emotions without real-world risk. Regardless of the solution, the paradox compels a deeper examination of the intricate relationship between belief, cognition, and the profound, often irrational, landscape of human emotion.

If you found this valuable, consider supporting our work.