The Enduring Relevance of "On Bullshit”

Nearly forty years ago, American philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt published an essay titled "On Bullshit." Initially gaining cult status in academic circles, it wasn't until 2005, when the essay was published as a book, that it became a mainstream success, spending 27 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list and turning Frankfurt into a frequent commentator and TV guest.

Frankfurt was the first to analyze the concept of 'bullshit' seriously. Since then, many books, lectures, and even bullshit bingo games have emerged. But does his work hold up today? For Frankfurt, "On Bullshit" remains a serious analysis aiming to outline the structure and significance of the concept.

He begins by examining Max Black's concept of humbug, which shares many similarities with bullshit. Frankfurt uses Black's work to identify defining characteristics, such as the misrepresentation of others' thoughts, feelings, or attitudes. This distinction allows Frankfurt to differentiate between humbug and lies. The primary difference lies in the intention: humbug involves misrepresentation, while lying is a more extreme act aimed at covering the truth.

Frankfurt's key point is the difference between lying and bullshit, centered on intention. Both liars and truth-tellers are concerned with the truth. The liar aims to prevent the discovery of the truth, while the truth-teller seeks to present it. The bullshitter, however, disregards the truth altogether, focusing instead on saying something impressive or interesting. According to Frankfurt, producing bullshit does not require any concern for the truth, making it potentially more harmful to society than lying, as bullshitters completely ignore the truth.

‍

‍The Attention Economy‍

Frankfurt concludes his book by discussing the rise of bullshit, noting that while the amount of bullshit may not have increased proportionately, the sheer volume of communication has. Thus, there is more bullshit circulating today.

This analysis, forty years later, needs updating. Frankfurt couldn't have foreseen the internet and the attention economy that has transformed our society, turning the extreme and the spectacular into commodities. Influencers and opinion leaders now thrive on pushing the bizarre and the extreme.

The term 'attention economy' was coined by economist Michael Goldhaber in 1997, predicting a 'star system' driven by the battle for attention. Unlike past societies focused on land, labor, and knowledge, today's economy revolves around attention.

Realistically, Frankfurt's bullshit, now often referred to as fake news—misinformation, conspiracy theories—is arguably the greatest threat to democratic societies today. Analysts agree that the amount of nonsense has increased dramatically. Recent statistics from the U.S. show that less than half of Americans now trust scientific efforts to document factual truth, a situation exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, analyses from the Danish fact-checking media TjekDet indicate the same trend.

By Frankfurt's definitions, today's public discourse is dominated by three types of bullshit, ranging from the arguably acceptable form of 'alternative' science to deliberate distortions:

• Pseudoscience, or 'junk science,' consists of fabricated claims presented as research but are actually subjective notes paid for by a company.
• Influencer nonsense, involving seemingly harmless chatter about nutrition, crystal healing, and other dubious therapies, which can include quackery and commercial exploitation, such as selling ineffective hand sanitizers during the pandemic.‍
• Conspiracy theories, deliberate misinformation spreading distrust in authorities, such as claims that Bill Gates is behind everything or that COVID-19 was a distraction for setting up 5G towers.

‍

The Demand for Truth

So, what can be done? This isn't about opposing fun, exaggerations, or rhetorical devices, which can serve communicative purposes. Nor is it about infringing on people's right to their beliefs.

However, we can all advocate for truth and relevance in our public communication. One way forward is Socrates' three wise questions, or his Triple Filter Test:

• Truth: Is what you’re about to say true? Have you thoroughly checked and controlled the facts?‍
• Goodness: Is what you’re about to say kind?‍
• Necessity: Is what you’re about to say necessary?

These questions can help reduce the amount of bullshit we contribute to public discourse.