We should take this philosophical definition of bullshit critically. After all, truth and lies have been around for centuries, what actual authority does Frankfurt have to introduce something new?
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. |
Why is Frankfurt an exception?
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”.
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?
How else can we view this?
There is of course a certain amount of pride involved in philosophy, but perhaps Frankfurt’s bullshit should be viewed even more critically since he essentially removes himself from the problem. Erik Olsson somewhat calls Frankfurt out on this in Knowledge, Truth, and Bullshit, citing a contradiction in the fact that bullshit is so problematic yet our society continues to prosper while ostensibly so full of it.
As with anyone claiming to have a monopoly on the truth, we as a society should question those who Frankfurt’s logic and motives.
Alexandra,
ReplyDeleteYay! I really liked the first version of your piece and I think the little section you added on for this version only strengthened your point, especially because you broaden it up to question anyone who claims to have a monopoly on truth. I also like how you brought in a specific example of someone who disagrees with how Frankfurt has presented himself.
I know there's only so much you can cover with a limited word count, but reading your piece makes me think about how truth has changed in the modern day, especially the role that it plays in politics today. Perhaps if you had more space, you could also mention modern-day applications of that type of motive questioning.
Hi Alexandra, I really liked your post! I didn't see your initial post with the same title, but after having read both, I'm glad to have come across it. As far as content goes, you did a really good job of discussing Frankfurt's piece and the implications of bullshit. I really liked your counter argument at the end of the revision commenting on Frankurt's own bullshit. However, it doesn't really feel like it flows naturally into the rest of your piece. I really loved the phrase "monopoly on the truth" and love that you recognize we need to call out Frankfurt for his potential bullshit - we need to be more critical and more apprehensive of people who claim to be experts on the topic of ethics. In general, really good post, but I would think about how you could more smoothly transition into your contradiction.
ReplyDeleteDefinitely a noticeable improvement from your initial draft to your final submission. The additional section you added at the end of this final draft definitely enhances the piece, providing some extra analysis of the idea at hand. You tone is also super effortless, it is easy to tell that you are a great writer. For future reference, I would attempt to choose a topic that is bit more related to the content of the class and more to do with the ethics of AI.
ReplyDelete