On Bullshit

A few days ago, I was browsing the philosophy section at my local bookstore. I found a small volume entitled “On Bullshit”. Intrigued, I briefly flipped through it and discovered that the author was Dr. Harry G. Frankfurt, a Princeton philosophy professor. I bought it immediately.

I’ll admit I purchased the book primarily due to the fact that it was a scholarly, philosophical essay about a rather unconventional topic. However, I was pleasantly surprised by the slight volume's insightful arguments. Frankfurt begins by examining the role of bullshit in our society:

“One of the most salient features of our culture is that there is so much bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted. Most people are rather confident of their ability to recognize bullshit and to avoid being taken in by it. So the phenomenon has not aroused much deliberate concern, or attracted much sustained inquiry.”

Frankfurt, who writes clear, articulate prose and has a subtle wit, states his intentions in the second paragraph: “I propose to begin the development of a theoretical understanding of bullshit, mainly by providing some tentative and exploratory philosophical analysis.” Later, he wryly adds, “So far as I am aware, very little work has been done on this subject”. As the book progresses, Frankfurt examines several conceptions of bullshit from numerous sources. He carefully considers the strengths and weaknesses of various definitions of bullshit, ranging from the works of renowned philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein to contemporary novelist Eric Ambler to the Oxford English Dicitonary. Frankfurt’s straightforward, analytical writing style is the ideal method for concisely analyzing bullshit.

Ultimately, Frankfurt concludes that the most salient feature of bullshit is its lack of respect for the truth. Bullshitters say whatever they want, as long as it suits their purposes, regardless of whether it is true or false. It's important to note that bullshitting is distinctly different from lying. Liars recognize that truth exists, respect its authority, but try to steer people away from it. Conversely, bullshitters have no respect for the truth and will say things, true or false, caring only about how it will benefit them. Frankfurt says that truth-tellers and liars are playing on the opposite sides of the same game (respecting the truth); bullshitters ignore the rules of the game altogether. In a classic example of his subtle, dry wit, Frankfurt echoes Friedrich Nietzsche and says, “bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are”.

Bullshit is so prevalent, says Frankfurt, because our democratic society encourages people to have an opinion on everything, regardless of whether they are qualified to discuss it. As an example, certain members of the religious right feel that they are qualified to discuss evolution. This results in topics like creationism, which are, according to Frankfurt’s definition, pure bullshit.

This line of thinking is quite similar to the final sentence in Ludwig Wittgenstein’s philosophical epic “Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus”: “Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.” I strongly agree with this philosophy: one shouldn't speak when one doesn't have anything relevant to say. Of course having a general knowledge of a wide range of fields is important, but why attempt to bullshit one's way through a completely foreign topic? In the end, it will most likely backfire and make the speaker look both ignorant and dishonest.

Some have criticized the brevity of this book (a mere 67 pages). However, its length is a definite asset. Frankfurt’s analysis is concise but thorough, and I can’t think of anything more that he could have added. Adding length for the sake of length, as Frankfurt would say, is bullshit.

I’m glad that Frankfurt avoided talking extensively about the applications of his theory. First, his analysis is clear, so it’s easy for readers to determine its applications on their own. Any additional time spent on applications would have been wasteful. Second, I have no interest in hearing what Frankfurt thinks about politics; I doubt he is an expert on that topic. Talking about specific applications of his theory would be an exercise in bullshit. (However, the political implications of this book are quite fascinating. Leftists will surely use the book to argue that advertising and the media are bullshit, for fairly obvious reasons. However, right-wingers will find this book useful as well: Frankfurt attacks relativism towards the end, when he discusses the nature of objective truths).

I highly recommend “On Bullshit”. It’s a concise, eloquent and thorough examination of an important topic. It does an excellent job examining the subject and doesn’t waste a single word on anything unnecessary. In other words, “On Bullshit” contains no bullshit.