Comments on: On Bullshit and Mindfucking http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html Experiments and Thoughts on Quackery, Health Beliefs and Pseudoscience Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:47:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Gates on Libya: Not Making Sense « Therearenosunglasses’s Weblog http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-14410 Gates on Libya: Not Making Sense « Therearenosunglasses’s Weblog Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:56:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-14410 [...] Robert Gates is up to his usual spy doublespeak here, or CIA/military "mindfuck" agents are close to losing control of all their boiling cauldrons of treachery in the Middle East [...] [...] Robert Gates is up to his usual spy doublespeak here, or CIA/military "mindfuck" agents are close to losing control of all their boiling cauldrons of treachery in the Middle East [...]

]]> By: On Bullshit–Harry G. Frankfurt « Therearenosunglasses’s Weblog http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-14409 On Bullshit–Harry G. Frankfurt « Therearenosunglasses’s Weblog Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:52:09 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-14409 [...] On Bullshit–Harry G. Frankfurt 25 02 2011 On Bullshit [...] [...] On Bullshit–Harry G. Frankfurt 25 02 2011 On Bullshit [...]

]]> By: Homeopathy: It’s Bullshit « Ranty McRant's Spleen-Venting Blog http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-11324 Homeopathy: It’s Bullshit « Ranty McRant's Spleen-Venting Blog Mon, 12 Apr 2010 19:43:50 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-11324 [...] origin – that is, I think that homeopaths are bullshitters. The Quackometer has written about bullshitters and mindfuckers and I have long thought that many homeopaths probably come into the category of bullshitter. The [...] [...] origin – that is, I think that homeopaths are bullshitters. The Quackometer has written about bullshitters and mindfuckers and I have long thought that many homeopaths probably come into the category of bullshitter. The [...]

]]> By: Persiflage http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6322 Persiflage Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:05:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6322 I'm afraid that although I enjoyed the article very much, I wasn't terribly impressed with the distinction between a bullshitter and a liar given by McGinn.<br/><br/>"In examining the true nature of bullshit, we discover that in order to be a bullshitter you must intentionally represent yourself as competent and sincere and be trying to place this false belief in the listeners head that you are telling the truth."<br/><br/>In other words, you're knowingly telling a lie. In this case, the lie is about one's own competence to hold an opinion and the sincerity of one's beliefs in the information, but it's still a lie. Drawing a distinction between "someone who knowingly tells lies about the data" and "someone who knowingly tells lies about their own competence" is meaningless semantic hair-splitting.<br/><br/>"By continuously saying that meta-analyses are 'discredited' when they are not is just pure bullshit."<br/><br/>It's *lying*, is what it is, unless the speaker honestly believes that the meta-analyses are indeed discredited. <br/><br/>"Bullshitting", as used in everyday conversation, often refers to someone spouting off on a subject about which they know nothing, although they may or may not believe that they do.<br/><br/>Essentially, McGinn seems to be saying that "Bullshit is only bullshit when it's a deliberate lie", which is a circular redefinition of Frankfurt's attempted distinction, leading to bullshit = lying-in-a-specific-way.<br/><br/>Frankfurt's assertion that bullshit is "stating something as true when the speaker doesn't know whether or not it really is in order to bolster an argument" is a more useful distinction, and one that more closely follows common useage.<br/><br/>Bullshitting may, or may not, in any given instance *also* be lying. The important thing for most purposes is that it is bullshit, regardless of whether the speaker believes it!<br/><br/>That's my two-pennorth, anyway. I’m afraid that although I enjoyed the article very much, I wasn’t terribly impressed with the distinction between a bullshitter and a liar given by McGinn.

“In examining the true nature of bullshit, we discover that in order to be a bullshitter you must intentionally represent yourself as competent and sincere and be trying to place this false belief in the listeners head that you are telling the truth.”

In other words, you’re knowingly telling a lie. In this case, the lie is about one’s own competence to hold an opinion and the sincerity of one’s beliefs in the information, but it’s still a lie. Drawing a distinction between “someone who knowingly tells lies about the data” and “someone who knowingly tells lies about their own competence” is meaningless semantic hair-splitting.

“By continuously saying that meta-analyses are ‘discredited’ when they are not is just pure bullshit.”

It’s *lying*, is what it is, unless the speaker honestly believes that the meta-analyses are indeed discredited.

“Bullshitting”, as used in everyday conversation, often refers to someone spouting off on a subject about which they know nothing, although they may or may not believe that they do.

Essentially, McGinn seems to be saying that “Bullshit is only bullshit when it’s a deliberate lie”, which is a circular redefinition of Frankfurt’s attempted distinction, leading to bullshit = lying-in-a-specific-way.

Frankfurt’s assertion that bullshit is “stating something as true when the speaker doesn’t know whether or not it really is in order to bolster an argument” is a more useful distinction, and one that more closely follows common useage.

Bullshitting may, or may not, in any given instance *also* be lying. The important thing for most purposes is that it is bullshit, regardless of whether the speaker believes it!

That’s my two-pennorth, anyway.

]]> By: geetha http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6306 geetha Tue, 03 Jun 2008 10:44:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6306 excellent.<br/>it's so frustrating when your close friends are besotted by the homeopathy woo and you are unable to make a dent in their minds. however i keep trying .... <br/>geetha excellent.
it’s so frustrating when your close friends are besotted by the homeopathy woo and you are unable to make a dent in their minds. however i keep trying ….
geetha

]]> By: Le Canard Noir http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6280 Le Canard Noir Mon, 26 May 2008 21:25:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6280 Thousands of MDs and PhDs????<br/><br/>Name your top five...<br/><br/>Bet you can't. Thousands of MDs and PhDs????

Name your top five…

Bet you can’t.

]]> By: Jimserac http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6277 Jimserac Sat, 24 May 2008 20:56:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6277 Did you say this? "Homeopaths are renowned bullshitters. They do not care about the truth. They are extremely reluctant to say anything definitive that can be proven wrong. They do not test their ideas themselves in any meaningful way. They will say anything to make themselves look plausible in the face of sincere criticism."?? -> <br/><br/>Looks like you're engaging in some serious BULLSHIT yourself! Go tell it to the thousands of MD's PhD's and other perfectly well credentialed researchers who are investigating and VALIDATING Homeopathy every day, they'll be real impressed by YOUR bullshit. Did you say this? “Homeopaths are renowned bullshitters. They do not care about the truth. They are extremely reluctant to say anything definitive that can be proven wrong. They do not test their ideas themselves in any meaningful way. They will say anything to make themselves look plausible in the face of sincere criticism.”?? ->

Looks like you’re engaging in some serious BULLSHIT yourself! Go tell it to the thousands of MD’s PhD’s and other perfectly well credentialed researchers who are investigating and VALIDATING Homeopathy every day, they’ll be real impressed by YOUR bullshit.

]]> By: Francis Shanahan http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6253 Francis Shanahan Sun, 11 May 2008 13:26:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6253 Discussed at FrancisShanahan[.com]<br/><a HREF="http://francisshanahan.com/detail.aspx?cid=677" REL="nofollow" rel="nofollow">http://francisshanahan.com/detail.aspx?cid=677</a> Discussed at FrancisShanahan[.com]
http://francisshanahan.com/detail.aspx?cid=677

]]> By: Le Canard Noir http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6230 Le Canard Noir Wed, 07 May 2008 23:25:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6230 Steven Novella discusses bullshit at Neurologica...<br/><br/><br/>http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php?p=286 Steven Novella discusses bullshit at Neurologica…

http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php?p=286

]]> By: paulC http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6220 paulC Mon, 05 May 2008 09:20:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2008/05/on-bullshit-and-mindfucking.html#comment-6220 sorry - proselytizing. sorry – proselytizing.

]]>