On Bullshit. Princeton Professor Publishes Lowdown Analysis
Princeton Professor Harry Frankfurt’s 1986 essay “On Bullshit” has been re-examined in light of the proliferation of “fake news” and the impact of politicians who regularly twist the truth or make baseless claims.
When Frankfurt originally wrote the essay, he noted that the concept of bullshit had been “neglected” by philosophy, despite being a common part of discourse. He argued that people who engage in bullshit are more dangerous than liars because they’re not concerned with the truth; they’re concerned with gaining power or influence.
To Frankfurt, a liar may be dishonest, but they at least care that what they say is false. A bullshitter, in contrast, doesn’t care if what they say is true or false, as long as it serves their purposes.
“Bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are,” concludes Frankfurt. “Lügen haben kurze Beine, or lies have short legs, says an old German proverb. Perhaps bullshitters do, too. But it makes no difference, so long as their speech is free.”
In his essay, Frankfurt argued that the rise of bullshit was linked to a cultural disregard for truth and the erosion of basic standards for trustworthy communication. He further went on to say that the worth of something said must be determined by more than the motives of the person saying it. The value of what someone says depends on whether it is true or false – something that may be hard to decipher in an era when everyone from talk-show hosts to scientists faces accusations of peddling falsehoods.
Over the years, Frankfurt has been careful to emphasize that the term “bullshit,” while often used pejoratively, can refer to a wide range of communication. Frankfurt is not arguing that we should only accept claims that are verifiable with empirical evidence, or that artistic and literary speech is meaningless. Rather, he is arguing for the importance of being able to separate out statements that are made to obscure the truth or manipulate people’s feelings from those that are made in good faith.
As Frankfurt himself saw it, the utility of this sort of inquiry lies in its ability to defend the truth against those who would dismiss it as irrelevant, distorting, or distracting. Because bullshit is focused on persuasion rather than information, it is a deep threat to the legitimate functioning of democratic institutions – which depend on an informed electorate.
The rise of “fake news,” political propaganda, and other forms of manipulative speech has only amplified the relevance of Frankfurt’s work. Today, it’s more important than ever to think critically about the information we consume, and to demand that our public officials and media sources act with transparency and honesty.
At the same time, though, it’s impossible to deny that bullshit is a deeply ingrained part of human communication. Whether it’s a presidential candidate’s exaggerated claims or a corporate executive’s spin on their company’s environmental record, we’re all exposed to a constant onslaught of manipulative language designed to shape our beliefs and behaviors.
Perhaps the best we can do is to remain vigilant, to develop our critical thinking skills, and to demand greater accountability from our leaders and institutions. By staying attuned to the dangers of bullshit, we can at least do our part to ensure that the truth continues to have a fighting chance in a world that often seems to value spin over substance.