On Bullshit is a book (originally a essay) by American philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt which presents a theory of bullshit that defines the concept and analyzes the applications of bullshit in the context of communication. Frankfurt determines that bullshit instance of bullshit. It is often, to be sure, what accounts for his making that utterance. However, it must not be assumed that bullshit always and necessarily has pretentiousness as its motive. Misrepresentation of somebody’s own thoughts, feelings, or attitudes: This provision that the perpetrator of humbug is American philosopher Harry Frankfurt published an essay on bullshit in It worked its way into culture after , when it was published as a small book. Now in the Trump age, it has worked its way into mainstream political commentary. It is routinely referenced in discussions about whether Trump is a liar or something blogger.comted Reading Time: 8 mins
On Bullshit - Wikipedia
American philosopher Harry Frankfurt published an essay on bullshit in It worked its way into culture on bullshit essaywhen it was published as a small book. Now in the Trump age, on bullshit essay, it has worked its way into mainstream political commentary.
It is routinely referenced in discussions about whether Trump is a liar or something else. Unfortunately, although the essay makes one insightful point, on the whole it is not an especially good piece on bullshit essay philosophy. I do not think people on bullshit essay to read it.
So, to spare you, this article is a critical summary. It is something of a book review. I will explain the important points while also discussing its shortcomings. After some highly dubious but ultimately irrelevant claims, Frankfurt provides a thesis statement:. I propose to begin the development of a theoretical understanding of bullshit, mainly by providing some tentative and exploratory philosophical analysis.
I shall not consider the rhetorical uses and misuses of bullshit. My aim is simply to give a rough account of what bullshit is and how it differs from what it is not, or putting it somewhat differently to articulate, more or less sketchily, the structure of its concept. In on bullshit essay, he is going to give you a theory of bullshit. The passage epitomizes analytic philosophy writing style.
I count five caveats or qualifications:. So we need to divide the caveats into two camps: 1 those about the essay and 2 those about on bullshit essay concept. Someone could give a tentative rough sketch of a precise concept. Someone could give a definitive account of a vague or amorphous concept which would certainly be a challenging task.
With a pile of both sorts of caveats, Frankfurt is telling you to lower your expectations. I am imposing them. The crucial insight of the essay comes in II. For the most part, the rest of the essay is unnecessary. It often reads as perfunctory, on bullshit essay, or padding.
Notice the caveats, people. An exception is the last paragraph. It introduces a couple deep thoughts about self-knowledge and sincerity.
For instance, lying to someone involves two deceptions : on bullshit essay only does the audience have a false belief about the world or whatever the lie is aboutbut they also have a false belief about what the liar believes. We are left unsure about why we crawled through the logic obstacle on bullshit essay of section I. Was it mental warm up, obligatory literature review, on bullshit essay, or padding the word count? It is some solid analytic-style logic chopping. As I said, section II is the only important one.
Yet the presentation is deeply unhelpful. The section revolves around two references to the early analytic philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, on bullshit essay.
The first is a poem verse that clumsily brings out the idea that shoddy and careless workmanship is related to bullshit. This is certainly true. Students do it routinely. I know I did. This sense of bullshit, in my view, is in tension with the sense that Frankfurt draws out with the second Wittgenstein reference. More on that in a moment. Since the story is supposed to bring out a point about bullshit, and it is difficult to see how the story is about bullshit, on bullshit essay is safe to say that Frankfurt should have chosen a better example.
After stipulating his semi-plausible interpretation of the story, on bullshit essay, Frankfurt makes the key move:, on bullshit essay. It does so, I believe, because he perceives what Pascal says as being — roughly speaking, for now — unconnected to a concern with the truth.
Her statement is not germane to the enterprise of describing reality. She concocts it out of whole cloth; or, if she got it from someone else, she is repeating it quite mindlessly and without any regard for how things really are. What she says is unconnected to the truth. That is it. The crucial insight. It is what people reference in political commentary today, on bullshit essay. There is no real argument for it though there might not need to be.
It is brief and filtered through a stilted construal of a bizarre anecdote. Frankfurt then moves to section III. But first, note that the two Wittgenstein references serve different roles. Frankfurt does not relate them. But the bullshitting I did on my high school English tests was not indifferent to how things really are. I had to make true sounding statements on bullshit essay phrase them in vague, prolonged, and superifically impressive on bullshit essay. In sum, the two senses of bullshit share broad similarities both involve misrepresentation but they are two separate senses.
Frankfurt does not acknowledge this. You can probably skip to the last paragraph. Of the remaining sections, only IV provides some philosophical insight, though it is mostly derivative of section II. But for the sake of completeness, here goes. The connections tend to be tenuous or insignificant. The most interesting point of the section is the link between bluffing and bullshitting. But the link is not discussed. Instead, Frankfurt uses it to transition to the next section.
Bullshit is phony and fake, on bullshit essay. A liar must construct their lies within the constraints of the truth. The truth-values of statements are relevant to a liar. A bullshitter has more freedom. This is the crux of the distinction between [the bullshitter] and the liar. Both he and the liar represent themselves falsely as endeavoring to communicate the truth. The fact about himself that the bullshitter hides, on the other hand, on bullshit essay, is that the truth-values of his statements are of no central interest to him; what we are not to understand is that his intention is neither to report the truth nor to conceal it.
We can derive the difference between the bullshitter and the liar from the difference between bullshit and lies found in section II. Frankfurt reiterates the difference at length in this section—even to the point of invoking St. The reference to Augustine is brief and unexplored. I doubt this is true. Frankfurt does not pursue the topic. Whether I am right about that I will leave as an exercise for the reader. The final section is too short for its aim. In it Frankfurt attempts to explain why there is so much bullshit.
An ambitious goal! Though we must bear in mind the pile of caveats. He on bullshit essay that the bullshit might be the result of the constant demands that people give their opinions on various topics. Here is where shit gets real. The focus is not on describing the external world but on coming to know oneself honestly. But what exactly is wrong with this? It also feels on bullshit essay we are dealing with a false dichotomy.
Frankfurt wants to reject the anti-realist drive. It is fundamentally incoherent, on his view: if we can give right and wrong descriptions of ourselves, the same must be true of the external world. Plus, it is a mistake to think that we live private, internal lives.
We live among others. And a condition of knowing ourselves is knowing others. Knowing ourselves is not as easy as we might assume, on bullshit essay. We are fluid, changing, on bullshit essay, hidden—at least, far more than other things in the world. When we notice this, the ideal of sincerity turns out to be bullshit.
With that nice tie-in, the essay ends. The ideal of sincerity may be false or misguided, but it exists in the context of attempting to find the best way of finding truths. The ideal is predicated on honesty. How, then, is it bullshit?
On Bullsh*t Jobs - David Graeber - RSA Replay
, time: 1:06:11STRIKE! Magazine – On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs
On Bullshit is a book (originally a essay) by American philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt which presents a theory of bullshit that defines the concept and analyzes the applications of bullshit in the context of communication. Frankfurt determines that bullshit In , the philosopher Harry G Frankfurt wrote an essay titled “ On Bullshit.” In he published it as a very small book. On Bullshit, Princeton University Press edition, became a New York Times bestseller despite being only 67 pages long with the approximate dimensions of an iPhone 6 Plus. I Estimated Reading Time: 3 mins On Bullshit In the essay, the writer goes into the meaning and significance of the word bullshit. The very idea of analysis of this word seems eccentric and even childish, but the arguments provided in the essay should not be taken lightly. The writer says that he feels there is too much bullshit around him
No comments:
Post a Comment