User Tag List

Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Harry G. Frankfurt: Bull?

  1. #1
    Molten Ash
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    68
    Threads
    34
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Harry G. Frankfurt: Bull?

    From Harry G. Frankfurt's On Bullshit


    "The contemporary proliferation of bullshit...has deeper sources, in various forms of skepticism which deny that we can have any reliable access to an objective reality, and which therefore reject the possibility of knowing how things truly are. These "antirealist" doctrines undermine confidence in the value of disinterested efforts to determine what is true and what is false, and even in the intelligibility of the notion of objective reality. One response to the loss of confidence has been a retreat from the discipline required by dedication to the ideal of correctness to a quite different sort of discipline, which is imposed by pursuit of an alternative ideal of sincerity. Rather than seeking primarily to arrive at accurate representations of a common world, the individual turns toward trying to provide honest representations of himself. Convinced that reality has no inherent nature, which he might hope to identify as the truth about things, he devotes himself to being true to his own nature. It is as though he decides that since it makes no sense to try to be true to the facts, he must therefore try instead to be true to himself.

    "But it is preposterous to imagine that we ourselves are determinate, and hence susceptible both to correct and to incorrect descriptions, while supposing that the ascription of determinacy to anything else has been exposed as a mistake. As conscious beings we exist only in response to other things, and we cannot know ourselves at all without knowing them. Moreover, there is nothing in theory, and certainly nothing in experience, to support the extraordinary judgment that it is the truth about himself that is the easiest for a person to know. Facts about ourselves are not peculiarly solid and resistent to skeptical dissolution. Our natures are, indeed, elusively insubstantial----notoriously less stable and less inherent than the natures of other things. And insofar as this is the case, sincerity itself is bullshit."



    Which I suppose means no one can suggest Frankfurt is actually being sincere about this, right?

    Unless of course the above is merely an exercise in irony.

    My own reaction is that Frankfurt has more or less hit the bullseye here because the bullseye is embedded in the inherently problematic nature of having a point of view about it at all.

    In other words, instead of aiming the discussion at what is said to be or not to be bullshit [free will, situational ethics, pragmatism, idealism, God, nihilism etc.] Frankfort seems to imply that those doing the aiming are, in turn, mere fonts of bullshit themselves. And if how we come to understand our own self is ultimately seen to be bullshit how could any perspective emanating from this profoundly problematic font not necessarily be bullshit as well? Then we only have to figure out how to juxtapose this point of view with the necessary assumption it cannot help but be bullshit too. Then we come face to face once again with the seeming intractable impediment of language itself in the attempts made to "resolve" it once and for all.

    Philosophically, perhaps, it is not whether you are being sincere that is the starting
    point.....but "who" "you" "are" when insisting this is so. Human identity as a kind of quantum mechanics? I may be sincere in believing this point of view is correct. But there is no way I can know it reflects what is true. The observation and the observer are always intricately intertwined in the seeming mystery of the entanglement itself.

    Thus how we think about ourselves can only be understood in relationship to all of the countless countervailing variables that came together over the years to create this particular point of view. In other words, who really knows what to expect when they turn the next corner. Even in reading this post it might trigger in you a whole new way of looking at things. And once that happens the potential for yet more change in your "reality" can rapidly evolve into that proverbial snowball.

    Then it only becomes a question of deciding whether or not this is the good news or the bad. Not that either assumption can be seen as anything other then yet more bullshit, of course.

    So by all means: choose wisely.


    rp


  2. #2
    BANNED: Repeated insults
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,828
    Threads
    13
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That is the sort of quagmire that one falls into when one uses "truth" as a guideline. Because as the author somewhat implies, the idea of "truth" presumes a view of reality that no one on earth posses. Although various people on the earth claim that their god posses such a view and they communicate with that god on a somewhat regular basis.

    But if the concept of "truth" is useless because we do not have a reliable and credible god’s eye view of reality needed to use it then what can we do?

    Look at science and how it is actually done (and not some lame definition from the dictionary). It has been chipping away at reality so there must be something in there that provides a way to do it.

    Starboy


  3. #3
    Volcanic Erupter Athena's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,152
    Threads
    384
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    " And if how we come to understand our own self is ultimately seen to be bullshit how could any perspective emanating from this profoundly problematic font not necessarily be bullshit as well?"

    When the philosophers of Athens asked how the Gods resolve their differences, they determined, reason, is the controlling force of the universe made manifest in speech.
    Calling reason bull shit is destructive to our understanding of our potential and what reason is. There is no one God's and individual's truth, but several points of view and a consensus on what is so and what is best.

    I think the problem really begins with this concept of ONE GOD, ONE POINT OF VIEW, ONE ABSOLUTE TRUTH. Give that up, and we can return to sanity. The Greek Gods were not prefect beings and they did not know absolute truth. The Greeks thought we were made in the image of the Gods, because like them, we can learn and we can reason.
    It is not the goal of democracy to know absolute truth, but to understand the Laws of Nature, and to make our laws accordingly. Relax- accept our humanness. We have done pretty good. We have doubled our life expectance and covered the earth with our own kind. Our only failure is we have forgotten the Gods who were the language of civilization, as quantum physics gives us the language for quantum physics. Today it is as Zeus feared, we have forgotten the Gods and rival them. We are technological smart but lack the wisdom to use this technology well. Okay, put down your arms and concentrate on wisdom for awhile. Enough, education for technology for military and industrail purpose. We need liberal education to advance civilization and sharing this earth democratically.

    I speak controversy so we have something to talk about. Don't take me too seriously.

  4. #4
    Sapere Aude Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    26,851
    Threads
    2217
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    289
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    sincerity itself is bullshit.
    I have to think he's using a healthy dose of sarcasm and satire with a tag line like that.



    The Forum Rules

    Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.
    [John F. Kennedy]
    The principal value of debate lies in the development of logical thought processes, and the ability to articulate your positions publicly.
    [Senator Dick Clark of Iowa]
    The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
    [Terry Pratchett]

  5. #5
    Molten Ash
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    68
    Threads
    34
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: Isherwood
    I have to think he's using a healthy dose of sarcasm and satire with a tag line like that.

    I think he is pointing out how ironic sincerity is. We embrace a point of view sincerely but the manner in which we acquire an identity that chooses to be sincere about this instead of that is largely fortuitous. Had things been very different in our lives we might easily be sincere from the very opposite perspective.

    In other words, if there is no way we can determine if our sincerity is rooted in What is True what does it really matter how sincere we are?

    We end up applauding someone for being sincere unless they are being sincere about something we in turn sincerely find to be abominable.

    Then what?


    rp


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •