Where do I begin? This is written identical to Frankfurts' "On Bullshit". Every other sentence seems like a question to another question Eubanks and Schaeffer just posed. The two articles, "A Kind Word for Bullshit" and "On Bullshit", continuously take their readers in circles. The minute I start to think I have something down the next sentence takes me to another concept of what bullshit means and how bullshit and lying are different or similar, or the same or the complete opposite, or whatever.
Eventually I found a way to get something out of this article, or at least make myself believe I'm getting something...bullshitting myself maybe? Probably. When I find a sentence that actually makes some sort of connection in my brain I write it down. Then throughout the rest of the article, anything that is comparable or similar and connects with that sentence I write it down. In the end I can usually come up with some conclusion, whether it is right or not, about a concept in the article.
For example, I keep hearing that a bullshitter is not a liar because they are extracted from the truth, and that they are misrepresenting themselves and not misrepresenting true facts necessarily. "According to Frankfurt, bullshit does not necessarily involve a misrepresentation of the facts, but must involve the misrepresentation of the self--one's feelings, thoughts or attitudes. "
I feel like I can maybe decipher between bullshit and a lie, but I have yet to make a solid connection to what academic bullshit is, or the point that any of the authors are attempting to make. If anyone has any insight, you should let me know!
If you read the abstract before Eubanks and Schaffer's article they state their claim: "some forms of Academic BS are "unavoidable and beneficial." The key to understanding their piece lies in figuring out why they think that is true.
ReplyDeleteI'm right there with you when it comes to being slightly confused. A part of me wants to say that both of these writings are themselves academic bullshit, but I refrain. I do believe that there is a larger meaning that can be derived from these readings, but it is a hard thing to do when there is so much focus on the minutia.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the fact that both essays lead you around in circles, but it was done for a reason. The author wants us to form our own conclusions from their essays, and basically "bullshit" our selves in a way. For example, this theme of misrepresenting ourselves could basically say that we are bullshitting others constant. For isn't it true, that we put on a false face, so to speak, in front of others. When we had to write our essay on "appropriate language" we were "bullshitting" professor Sandy in a way because we were either flourishing our essays with an extra word here or there, so we weren't true to ourselves. It we take this concept, then academic bullshit makes sense because we are always writing a few levels above our comfort zone in order to achieve the better grade. At least, that is what I believe academic bullshit to be.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your comment, Melanie, that "we are always writing a few levels above our comfort zone ..." but I don't think you should do it to "achieve a better grade." Do it to push yourself to develop yourself as a writer.
ReplyDelete