ok shitpost time.
Technically the paper is about the personification of objects in relation to autism.
If you do not read the paper it will be sad. Since it’s the paper being sad, and not you thinking that the paper will be sad, technically we could argue that the paper is just lonely and wants somebody to talk to.
i wouldn’t have done it if the paper didn’t say it was itself.
Arguably the paper here is personifying itself, our interpretation of it is dependent on whether or not we want to believe the paper or not. I’m not the one ascribing the emotion of sadness to the paper, it’s the paper ascribing it to itself. I’m merely interpreting what the paper says to be the probable truth here.
And why do you interpret what the paper says (that it can feel sadness) as true ?
