What is bullshit?
In his 2009 version of On Truth, Lies, and Bullshit, Frankfurt explains his personal definition of bullshit at a dawdling pace akin to a garage truck. To Frankfurt, bullshit consists of two main pillars: (1) a disregard for the “real truth” and (2) An attempt to persuade.Unlike the poetic liar, bullshitters do not need to know or care about the truth at all. The only goal of the bullshitter is that their listener believes their impression. Whether what they are communicating is true or not, this actor’s raison d’être is to misrepresent him or herself.
 |
| Frankfurt fondly citing Shakespeare. |
What is an ethics professor?
Taken literally, a professor is a person who professes. They are teachers of the highest rank and experts in some field, meaning not only do they proclaim things, but they are affirming their own faith or allegiance to their field.Of course ethics, or moral philosophy, is a little more complicated than that. It’s true definition varied depending on the source of the information. But it’s something to do with behaviors and their consequences, or lessons about what is acceptable versus what is not.
Therefore, with those definition in mind, we can say that a professor of ethics is one who professes morality. A person who both teaches and seeks to remove problems of morality through the concepts of “good", “right”, “virtue", and “justice”.
What does that spell?
Putting these two ideas of bullshit and ethics professors together constructs an interesting exception of bullshit. Taking the definition of bullshit literally, a person who cares about the truth is unable to bullshit. Therefore professors have any stake in the value of truth aren’t able to bullshit because they value it.Superior much, Frankfurt?
Hi Alexandra, nice post! I liked your use of citations and how you built off them as your post continued. Your explanations of ethics and bullshit were also easy to understand, and I liked how you tied that explanation together. Good explanation on the relation of ethics to higher learning, too! Sometimes it’s helpful to think about a topic that way. The only suggestion I have is to maybe use more images in the future, it’s a good idea to visually stimulate your readers!
ReplyDeleteAlexandra — you had a great tone and energy throughout this piece! I especially liked that you linked to a literal video of garbage trucks (made me chortle). You very deftly point out this pretentious twist in Frankfurt's argument, and do so in a straightforward, engaging way. The ideas you discuss from the readings are clearly inspiration for your post. Your section headers broke the piece down into even more digestible sections, which is great for lazy readers. Your title was short but sweet and very efficiently conveys exactly what the post is about. I also liked the pictures you used — just another twist of humor!
ReplyDeleteMy only suggestion would be to try to have a slightly punchier ending to really tie up all of the ends. I think you have a solid framework already, but maybe just another sentence or two to super seal the deal and clarify the dichotomy between the two sections of your argument would be perfect.
I enjoyed reading this, as it was both informative and proposed a viewpoint that I had never thought of. However, the proposed idea is not really expressed outside of the last paragraph. The other sections are interesting and do help support your final claim, but I would suggest limiting those sections down to the bare necessities and bolstering the final one. Overall, well done!
ReplyDelete