Jerry
On 4/15/07, Wojtek Sokolowski <swsokolowski at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- Jerry Monaco <monacojerry at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > But see my little review _Retail & Wholesale
> > Bullshit: Criticism &
> > Quotes on Frankfurt's 'On Bullshit"_
> > http://monacojerry.livejournal.com/31891.html
> >
>
> [WS:] An interesting essay. I certainly agree with
> your proposition that social-historical context
> (missing from Frankfurt's essay) is crucial for
> analyzing the concept of bullshit.
>
> With that it mind, the concept of bullshit presupposes
> a certain definition of "truth" - namely truth as
> empirical verification. In societies or traditions
> that do not accept such a defintion (cf. Heidegger's
> eassy "The Age of the World Picture" arguing that such
> defintion is a modern phenomenon) the concept of
> bullshit would take an entirely new meaning (if it
> were meaningful at all.) For example, in a culture
> that defines truth as "consistency withe the dogma" -
> the statements that you define as "wholesale bullshit"
> would likely to be ones that are true. If the dogma
> is that "America is the greatest country on Earth" -
> the 4th of July oration would certainly have the
> "true" value (=consistent with the dogma). It is easy
> to extend this line of thought to other forms of
> political discourse and to public relations,
> advertising, and pomo discourse as well.
Woj,
Very good point here. Thanks for the observation.
> With that in mind, the concept of "bullshit" seems
> very similar to Kantian (Prolegomena) concept of
> metaphysics (=propositions whose truth cannot be
> confirmed or rejected) - so the question arisises why
> is it desirable to use the vernacular "bullshit"
> instead of the time honored "metaphysics." My hunch
> is that it has something to do with the "populization"
> of the discourse in the US - mere technical accuracy
> is not enough, concpet must also have populist (or
> popular) appeal. "Bullshit" has such an appeal,
> "metaphysics" does not. This populization of
> philosophical discourse woud itself be an example of
> bullshitting.
>
> Another comment - the reason I made a reference to
> Frankfurt in my previous posting was to make it clear
> that I used the term "bullshit" as a descriptor rather
> than an ad hominem slur. The idea I tried to convey
> was that the statements that I was criticizing were
> beyond truth value - or in the light of the above
> remarks - not empircially verifiable. Instead they
> are consistent with dogmas (left-wing, right-wing,
> religous, patriotic, etc.), and as such "true"
> regardless of any evidence or lack of it.
>
> Wojtek
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-- Jerry Monaco's Philosophy, Politics, Culture Weblog is Shandean Postscripts to Politics, Philosophy, and Culture http://monacojerry.livejournal.com/
His fiction, poetry, weblog is Hopeful Monsters: Fiction, Poetry, Memories http://www.livejournal.com/users/jerrymonaco/
Notes, Quotes, Images - From some of my reading and browsing http://www.livejournal.com/community/jerry_quotes/