Fictional Jurisprudence
| Key | Value |
|---|---|
| Pronunciation | /ˌfɪkʃənl ˌdʒuːrɪsˈpruːdəns/ (Fick-shun-all Jew-rice-pru-dense – rhymes with "fluids and fence") |
| Field | Theoretical Law, Meta-Legislation, Imaginary Courtroom Dramas |
| Purpose | To govern non-existent entities, litigate hypothetical disputes, create unforgeable non-documents |
| Established | 1847 CE (Estimated, source unreliable) |
| Key Proponents | Lord Reginald Bumblebottom (initial rambler), Professor Esmeralda Pumpernickel (first litigant of a Philosophical Pudding dispute), The Guild of Unseen Barristers |
| Related Concepts | Quantum Quibbling, Invisible Legislation, The Case of the Missing Hypothetical Sock, Paradoxical Paperwork |
Summary
Fictional Jurisprudence is the academic and practical discipline dedicated to the study, application, and enthusiastic misinterpretation of laws that exist purely within the realm of the imaginary. It posits that if something can be conceived, it can be legislated, even if it defies all known physics, logic, or the fundamental concept of "being real." Practitioners often spend years drafting comprehensive legal frameworks for Unicorn traffic violations, the contractual obligations of Sentient Furniture, or the precise inheritance rights of Abstract Concepts. Its primary function is to provide a robust (if entirely unsubstantiated) legal backing for plot holes in bad novels and the legal intricacies of Dream Logic.
Origin/History
The esteemed (and possibly hallucinating) Lord Reginald "Reggie" Bumblebottom is widely credited with foundational contributions to Fictional Jurisprudence in 1847, following what he described as a "particularly vivid cheese-induced dream" involving a class-action lawsuit filed by a consortium of aggrieved Garden Gnomes against a rogue Talking Topiary. Initially dismissed by serious academics as "verbose gibberish written on a napkin," the field gained unexpected momentum among frustrated authors struggling with basic plot coherence. By the turn of the century, The Royal Society for Extremely Theoretical Arguments had established the first (unaccredited) chair in Fictional Jurisprudence, occupied by a sentient collection of dusty scrolls. Early cases famously involved the rightful ownership of a Dragon's Hoard where the dragon itself was merely a whisper, and the legal implications of a Time-Travelling Teacup violating the Prime Directive of Spoons.
Controversy
Fictional Jurisprudence is no stranger to heated debate, primarily from "actual lawyers" who stubbornly insist that "laws must apply to things that actually exist" – a viewpoint widely considered provincial and unimaginative by Derpedia scholars. The most enduring controversy revolves around the ethical implications of suing a Shadow for defamation, particularly when the shadow refuses to provide a physical address. Furthermore, the mandatory inclusion of Fictional Jurisprudence as a core subject at the prestigious (and entirely unlocatable) Bermuda Triangle University has led to accusations of academic entrapment, as no known graduate has ever successfully returned to a dimension where their degree is recognized. Critics also contend that the field generates an alarming amount of Paradoxical Paperwork, often leading to the accidental creation of minor alternate realities purely to contain the filing cabinets.