Why is bullshit necessary or important?
Mood:  a-ok
Topic: Philocafe Session Reports
My philosophy cafe session on Apr 20 saw a record turnout, because of a recent mention in a newspaper article. Our content was slightly different from the usual, in that its stimulus was a slightly dated (as opposed to recent) news item. A month ago, The Observer of London said a philosophical book entitled On Bullshit had just been published. Its author is Harry G. Frankfurt, a noted moral philosopher at Princeton University.

Frankfurt gives an example of bullshit. Wittgenstein phones his friend Pascal to ask how she was after her tonsillectomy. She says ?like a dog that?s been run over?. Wittgenstein replies: ?you don?t know what a dog that?s been run over feels like.? Pascal is spouting bullshit.

And so our group begins discussing our Question for the Evening.

The necessity or importance of bullshit (BS) lies in its purpose, or what it is used for. It is used for flattery, which in turn is often both necessary and important for survival (e.g. flattering the boss) and happiness (flattering the spouse). BS is also used in entertainment (e.g. comedy), which in turn clearly promotes happiness. So also is BS used to warm up an audience (e.g. so called icebreakers) prior to serious activity.

Someone suggests we define BS before we proceed further. I warn against the common philosophical danger of becoming obsessed with definitions, and of the entire evening being consumed by definitional activity. So we set a deadline time. Another participant points out that BS takes both noun (e.g. ?Pascal is spouting bullshit.?) and verb (e.g. ?Pascal is bullshitting Wittgenstein.?) forms.

We deal with the noun form first. Bullshit is false, deceptive, without substance, metaphorical, humorous, and relative to the speaker or listener. Next, the verb form. To bullshit is to think aloud, as in the Socratic method; to bullshit is to exaggerate or to distort. I suggest that these two are not necessarily compatible, but we decide not to turn the session into a definitional one. So, armed with a vague idea of what BS is (which is better than with no idea at all), we continue to consider our main question.

Bullshit is used to deceive. But this may not always be a bad thing, as in the case of white lies and buffers, which may be necessary to save jobs (e.g. to correct a mistake without telling the boss) and lives (e.g. not to tell a dying person about his true state of illness).

A suggestion is made that we need to distinguish necessity and importance. What is necessary is important; but what is important may not be necessary. An interesting question, but we do not pursue it, again for fear of entering into another definitional enquiry.

BS can also be used to create fantasies, which we use to destress ourselves from everyday life. All these can be said to be necessary and important.

I end the session by revealing Frankfurt?s views. Bullshit differs from lies, in that lies are known and conscious falsehoods whereas bullshit does not care whether it is true or false (hence a statement can be bullshit and true). This difference makes bullshit more dangerous than lies. Bullshit is more prevalent now than ever before because of the communications revolution. More information is demanded than truth can supply; so bullshit proliferates.

The most important discovery of the evening was that a serious philosophical discussion can be had on even so apparently outrageous a topic as bullshit.