The late Princeton University philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt might just be best known, when he’s known, for a little book titled On Bullshit. When I say little, I mean the library copy I currently have on my desk measures roughly 4×6 inches, and is a bit under 1 cm thick. 20oz mug included for size reference.
I’d heard of this book before at an academic conference when a former classmate of mine used it to consider whether or not the Roman politician Cicero’s works fell under the titular category or not (conclusion/thesis: mostly, yes). I’ve come back to actually read it in order to consider whether or not I want to use it when addressing political rhetoric in an intro to composition class (the required intro to college writing class most people have to take in some form their first year, probably first semester).
The main question is basically one of definition beyond the general feeling most of us probably have that we know it when we see/hear it. To get to a definition, Frankfurt starts with a related word/concept “humbug” (yes, the same word popularized by Charles Dickens via Ebenezer Scrooge). Based on those qualities and how they do or do not apply to Frankfurt’s concept, he also gets into intentionality, epistemology, and some other philosophical/rhetorical questions. The basic starting definition of “humbug” and the starting point though not final definition for “bullshit” is: “deceptive misrepresentation, short of lying, especially by pretentious word or deed, of somebody’s own thoughts, feelings, or attitudes.” Frankfurt goes through this phrase by phrase, and then removes, adjusts, and adds a bit. One of the main sticky points is what is the line between a lie and “short of lying”. Once these questions are generally settled insofar as is possible, the final question is “why is there so much bullshit?” The answer is multi-point, but one of the first is, “Bullshit is unavoidable whenever circumstances require someone to talk without knowing what he is talking about.” I’m just going to leave this here without comment.
Since rhetorical analysis is basically a required unit of most intro to college writing classes, I’m thinking this might be a way to get away from the usually bland or uninspiring applications of the triangle, canons, or logical fallacies. If you put On Bullshit in standard 9×13 paper, it’s roughly 20 pages. This might be on the longer side for first semester college students, but I’m thinking it might be worth it.