Customer Reviews

On Bullshit

5 star:		(61)
4 star:		(39)
3 star:		(22)
2 star:		(18)
1 star:		(44)

 

 

I got this book after seeing Prof. Frankfurt on the Daily Show with John Stewart. Having a bachelors degree in philosophy I was intrigued. Here are some of my observations:

1) This book is not traditionally funny. If you are looking for a joke book get one, this is a work of philosophy and as such has a degree of intellectual humor. Some of the observations and comments are funny but overall this is not a joke book, rather it is designed with a specific philosophical purpose... (he's an "ivy league" Philosophy Professor and published by Princeton)

2) Very short but to the point. I read the whole book in less than an hour. That being said there is a lot of content which deserves meaningful reflection... its one of those books that you will probably end up going "ahhh haaa" at least at one point.

3) Inexpensive. Its under ten bucks... some may say that its pricey for such a small book but if you enjoy it, whose to say what the intrinsic value will be to you down the road.

4) Warning... this is not the most complex or even dense piece of philosophy. Certainly its not like reading Hegel or another "headache philosopher" but this is a work of philosphy. As long as you know that going into this there should be no problems. A friend of mine read this book thinking it would be comical and fun, almost expecting jokes and punch-lines... he was disappointed.

The last thing I will say is that I really enjoyed the book and I can imagine many people really reading this book a couple of times and really liking it. I am already recommending it to some of my friends and lawschool professors... If you do decide to buy this book... ENJOY!

I confess that when I bought this book, I expected it to be a sort of quasi-satiric send-up of bulls**t. Then by about p. 10, I began thinking it was a really serious scholarly treatment of the subject. (I mean after all - a professor emeritus of moral philosophy at Princeton?) But as I got further into it, and after reading about 20 of the 140 reviews of the book on Amazon (how many books get 140 reviews?), I began to get the picture. It is indeed a humorous book--not a quasi-satiric har-har kind of joke book, but a very dry sort of academic humor. In fact, I believe it's an academic put-on--in fact, bulls**t about bulls**t. It is highly self-referential in the sense that a great deal of what it says about bulls**t is applicable to the book itself.

Most of the reviewers who figured this out gave it a low rating because they felt they had been conned by the catchy title and resented paying ten dollars for what is little more than a short essay conflated into a publishable format. In some cases, there might have been some degree of humor-impairment involved, but in most, I think it was simply disappointment and the feeling of having been cheated. But I think that misses the point of academic put-ons.

We hardly need to be told that there's a lot of bulls**t in today's culture, but I think it's relevant here to note that a lot of it is found in scholarly literature that sounds like bulls**t to anyone not privy to the particular discipline it is targeted to, but is sincerely meant to be taken seriously by its authors. (Frankfurt's last sentence, tellingly, is, "sincerity itself is bulls**t.") This can lead to fairly serious issues about misrepresentation, which is one of the central elements in Frankfurt's definition of bulls**t. If one perceives a work like this as intending to be taken seriously, then one has a right to feel that it has misrepresented itself and to be pretty disgusted at being taken in. But if one perceives it as a put-on and appreciates it on that level, then misrepresentation is not a problem.

A more serious example is known by the name of the Sokal Affair (see the Wikipedia article under that title). In this case (quoting from that article): "[Alan] Sokal, a professor of physics at New York University, submitted a pseudoscientific paper for publication in a postmodern cultural studies journal, as an experiment to see if a humanities journal would, in Sokal's words, `publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if (a) it sounded good and (b) it flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions' " There was a great brouhaha over all this because the journal felt Sokal had misrepresented his article as a piece of serious scholarship, and Sokal felt that anyone with good sense should have been able to tell it was bulls**t. Frankfurt's book may suffer from some of this ambiguity, and it may not be worth ten dollars (and certainly won't cause a major brouhaha), but if you can swallow the cost and appreciate the rather peculiar sort of humor involved, you may find it worthwhile.

Professor Harry Frankfurt has come up with a compact winner with this provocatively titled tome, all of eighty pages, about a subject around which we all seem to have a vast amount of experience. As a professional philosopher who has earned emeritus status at Princeton University, he surely must be a master at this topic and sets about to prove it by discussing it with irony, broad humor and a cheekiness that ultimately brings a certain seriousness to his work. He is especially effective in portraying the mental improvisation we go through when asked unexpected questions that require thoughtfulness. Whether it is within the context of a political opinion or literary analysis, the very act he discusses actually provides great motivation for someone to learn more about what he or she is saying.

What Frankfurt does is take his analysis several steps further by saying his subject, if left unaddressed, will lead to such an altered perception of reality that we will not know what reality is. His argument about his subject as an indictment has merit, though at times, he seems to be carried away with his own rhapsodizing, rather ironic given the topic. According to the author, the very lack of sincerity in some schools of thought, epitomized by the rise of Nazism, for example, has led to a retreat from the ideal of correctness. I would have never thought of Nazism as the result of common BS, but Frankfurt makes this thinking seem entirely logical and that indeed it is a bigger threat than the outright lie. But he does not dwell on the delivery of such a message, as BS is more easily detectable than a lie, at least from most perspectives. A master at this topic fakes opinions with finesse, but he or she does not necessarily get things wrong. That is exactly the threat described perceptively by the author as "a lack of connection to a concern with truth". In essence, the search for truth becomes a moot point when there is no concern in finding it. I applaud Frankfurt for his audacious and attentive little book, as it reflects a fertile mind taking on a subject we all know intimately but rarely take so seriously. Highly recommended commuter reading.

An arrow to the heart, and neither pedantic nor self-righteous. It goes from dry hilarity to concise philosophy in the wink of an eye. Wonderfully free of scholasticism and self-indulgence, and you can read and comprehend it (initially) in an hour. The self discipline and rewriting keeps it from being a clumsy 300 page waddle through redundant erudition. Best read in maybe 25 years.

First, let me clarify that _On Bullsh*t_ is a philosophical essay, and not a book on humor. Frankfurt attempts to analyze what BS is, and more importantly, how it is fundamentally similar to and different from a lie.

As philosophy goes, its pretty easy reading. The analysis is easy to follow, and I tend to agree with many of his conclusions: among them, that we accept BS more readily (and with better humor) than a lie; that someone spreading BS is more concerned with him/herself than the truth, and that the production of BS is stimulated whenever a person speaks beyond their knowledge.

Its a short, interesting read, and somewhat humorous (in a dry sort of way). Of its greatest importance, though, is that it will get you thinking about BS - who is giving it, who is taking it, and why. Recommended.

This short exploration of the history of the title word (which reviewers are not permitted to use) is really more of an essay in hardback rather than a book. Frankfurt analyzes some of the history and the meaning of the word, likening it to "humbug" and distinguishing it from lying. Perhaps the most interesting conclusion Frankfurt draws is the b.s. artist's disregard for the truth; that is, the artist talks without knowing or caring whether he is right or not. It is the telling, and not the content, that has importance for such a speaker.

I found myself wishing that Frankfurt had also delved into the psychology and sociology of humbug: why people feel the need to use it, why it is accepted, what purposes it can serve, its effects on both listener and speaker -- the very reasons for its widespread use. Instead, Frankfurt is more interested in the philosophy of it: its definition and distinguishing characteristics. This emphasis and its drawn out, sometimes redundant arguments opens this book to charges of being bull itself (although Frankfurt does seem to care about the truth.) The conclusion seems overblown and far too self-important for such a slim essay: "As conscious beings, we exist only in response to other things, and we cannot know ourselves at all without knowing them." The problem is, Frankfurt has not given a wide enough scope to his treatise and therefore does not give a full significance to his topic.

I will say this much for the essay: it has prompted me to be more conscious of b.s. in use. As I read Frankfurt's essay, I filled in my own theories of the psychology of the bull artist, and so it did indeed spur thought. Despite this, I found myself wishing for a deeper, more comprehensive examination.

While this edition is in book form, "On Bullsh*t" is really an essay. So, if you order it, expect to receive a very tiny book. And if you search the Internet for more than a few minutes, you'll probably find the complete text fairly easily. I'm pretty sure this essay has been floating around for a couple of decades. Having said that, this is a thought provoking and entertaining look at an important aspect of moral philosophy.

Everyone, at one time or another, finds him/herself irritated, agitated or otherwise -ated about the bullsh*t they endure. And who among us hasn't contributed in some way with bullsh*t of our own?

Dr. Frankfurt's comparison of bullsh*t to humbug was a little bit lost on me. After all, my only exposure to the word "humbug" has been Scrooge's exclamation in "A Christmas Carol." But, it did cause me to rethink some scenes from Dickens' book.

The comparison of bullsh*tters to liars is the meat here. Dr. Frankfurt convincingly explains that liars understand and respect the truth enough to deceive their listeners into believing a falsehood, while bullsh*tters have no regard for the truth whatsoever. They are concerned only with how their audience perceives them.

In classic philosopher style, Dr. Frankfurt builds on his own ideas and climaxes with the rather surprising notion that "sincerity itself is bullsh*t!" arguing in a way that will have you believing it.

I have no idea when exactly this essay was written, but I did notice that there was absolutely no mention of the Internet. In fact, there was only a passing mention of bullsh*t in mass media of any kind. I found myself wanting to read more about that. Of course, that topic might bloat this little book from 80 to 800 pages.

Unlike some other reviewers, I'm giving Dr. Frankfurt extra points for the title. A philosophy book about bullsh*t certainly can't have some bullsh*t, scholarly title. This title says exactly what the book is about, no more, no less, no bullsh*t.

For a philosophy book, this is a very fun read. Even though you can probably find it online, it's a very nicely bound little volume that will be good to have around to reread occasionally. You might want to buy a small supply to leave as anonymous gifts for your favorite bullsh*tters.

(note: sorry about the *'s, but Amazon wasn't publishing my review.)

Harry G. Frankfurt, the author of this slight but thought provoking book, is a Professor of Philosophy Emeritus at Princeton University and a renowned moral philosopher. This is a serious discussion regarding the fact that bull---- occupies such a central role in much of the discourse which occurs in practically all facets of our culture, yet to the author's apparent chagrin this phenomenom "has not aroused much deliberate concern, nor attracted much sustained inquiry". His goal is no less audacious than than "to begin the development of a theoretical undestanding of bull----, mainly by providing some tentative and exploratory philosophical analysis". In my opinion, this discussion admirably achieves that goal; it also provides wonderful insights into modern day communication. But do not be mislead by the title, while very interesting and quite enjoyable, this discussion is neither light reading nor lighthearted in nature.

This book has three distinct attributes which I am certain in combination (and probably individually as well) make it unique among volumes which have appeared on the adult non-fiction best seller lists. First, the above mentioned fact that its author is a Philosophy Professor at Princeton University. Second, that it is published by the Princeton University Press, a definite indication that this is indeed a serious scholarly work. Third, that the complete text is only sixty-seven mini-pages in length. Thus, this is in fact only a moderately long essay undoubtedly meant to provoke both debate and further thought.

There are four elements of Frankfurt's analysis, and while they are largely sequential they do intersect somewhat with each other.. First he proceeds to attempt to provide some sort of definition of bull----, or at least to give his readers an understanding of what he means by the term. Second, he examines why there is so much of it. Third, he outlines what functions it serves. Finally and most importantly, he discusses why "we lack a conscientiously developed appreciation of what it means to us".

This book should be viewed as a relatively concise introductory volume to the exploration of Frankfurt's radical conclusion that the proliferation of bull---- today is because the notion of honesty and truth has been replaced by a belief in the importance of sincerity and this itself is bull----. My only complaint was that in a few places his discussions of the historical linguistic background of the term seemed a little tedious, but by the conclusion of the discussion I realized that the time spent integrating the historical and descriptive linguistic discussions was indicatve of his academic mode of inquiry and helped buttress his conclusion.

I strongly recommend this thought-provoking essay if you are interested in a possible explanation of why the proliferation of conversation in our culture today (think cell phones, reality TV, talk radio, and over five hundred channels) has combined with the need for "instant expertise" and focus on supposed transparency to supply us instead with a plethora of bull---- artists who are constantly painting beautiful pictures which unfortunately have only a tangential connection to reality.

While the author's understandably discussion proceeds in very broad generalities, I would like to suggest three groups who would be very well served to read this book in order to gain an understanding of why they are held in such low esteem. Undoubtedly, both the politicians and business leaders to whom it so broadly applies will be too busy to take the brief amount of time necessary to study it. In any case, they would probably would not absorb its implications and recognize its applicability to many of their statements even if they did take the time o read it. Most interestingly, it seems to me that this book is implicitly a very strong indictment of a major segment and perhaps even the majority of Frankfurt's colleagues in academia and their embrace of both deconstructionism and the politics of personal sincerity. He seemingly attacks the professional skepticism rampant on so many campuses, embraces the concept of honesty and rejects the "sincere bull----" so much in vogue today. THREE CHEERS FOR PROFESSOR FRANKFURT, and his willingness to examine the nature and the weaknesses of the relativism and the lack of concern for the truth which dominate so much of our discourse today.

Tucker Andersen

While this brief essay will clearly be useful to the casual practitioner, comprising a broad readership, it will resonate most vibrantly with the introspective artist. Take, for instance Professor Frankfurt's distinction between lying and BSing. The liar's focus is external; he lies to avoid the consequences of truth, or to enjoy the benefits of conscious deception. Both motivations require an awareness and appreciation of the truth. The BSer has no such moral clarity; he trods a path devoid of destination; he is simply out for the exercise. There is no pretense of ends justifying means. The BSer's intent is solely to appear knowledgable where he is not. Most damning is Professor Frankfurt's assertion of the inevitability of BS in a society which values Renaissance-like mastery of multiple disciplines when there are in fact so few multidisciplinarians among us. This book will also make a thought-provoking gift, notwithstanding the obvious risk of affront.

People use the word "BS" all the time, and we all have a rough, intuitive sense of what it means. But as Frankfurt notes, it's actually a very hard word to pin down. Over the years I've wondered, from time to time, what would be a good *explicit* definition. In "On BS", Frankfurt tries to answer this question. In my opinion, he succeeds. "On BS" offers a clear and convincing definition that explains why we describe many acts of communication--but not others--as being instances of BS. His definition also clarifies the distinction between BS and lies. I find that, now that I am mentally equipped with his definition, I can consider specific instances of BS encountered in daily life, and understand more clearly why I find them so contemptible!

This book is a bit denser than the usual summer read, so I recommend reading it twice; if you are like me you will enjoy it more the second time.