A well-known hard core conservative pundit, David Harsanyi writing at the hard core conservative site The Federalist, once argued the proposition that president Obama was a good BSer but a bad liar. It was posited like this: “Politicians break their promises and modify their positions all the time, of course. They BS us about their opinions and carefully craft identities that are palatable to the average voter. When a person enters this political universe, we need accept that most of the things we hear are, at best, poetic truths. But, yet, there is still a big difference between BSing and lying . . . .” According to the unreliable interwebs, BSing occurs “when someone has no f****ng clue what they are talking about, yet insists on trying to get others to believe him/her.”
The lament cites the “horrendous” job the political-media complex does because it routinely engages in “industrialized spin”, which was argued to be a bad thing that happens all the time. The author criticized misinformed, deceitful politics in general and president Obama's penchant to lie in particular. Obama allegedly always has a clue and therefore he does lies instead of BS.
Regarding the lies, BS, misinformation, deceit and spin in politics, politics-related social science research shows it's common, maybe the rule, not the exception. Politics really is based significantly on what one can argue is objectively false facts and objectively flawed common sense. Of course, that's not surprising in view of how weak and powerless human conscious thinking or bandwidth is relative to our much more powerful unconscious minds. That is true for democracies and probably all other forms of governance. In democracies, the typical voter has an inaccurate belief in how democracy really works or, more accurately, should work. A false belief in what “the will of the people” actually amounts to leads to cynicism. That's a bad thing for sure.
Writing an opinion piece entitled “The unbearable stench of Trump's B.S.” in the Washington Post on August 4, 2016, pragmatic commentator Fareed Zakaria asserts that Donald trump is an inveterate “bullshit artist” based on how the moral philosopher Harry Frankfurt (Princeton) distinguishes lies from BS in his 1986 book On Bullshit:
“Telling a lie is an act with a sharp focus. It is designed to insert a particular falsehood at a specific point. . . . In order to invent a lie at all, [the teller of a lie] must think he knows what is true.” By contrast, BS “is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all . . . except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says.” The BSer’s “focus is panoramic rather than particular” and he has “more spacious opportunities for improvisation, color, and imaginative play. This is less a matter of craft than of art. Hence the familiar notion of the ‘bullshit artist.’ ”
One can ask, so what? Why does any of this make any difference given how misinformation- or deceit-based and self-interested political rhetoric and thinking is? After all, almost all misinformation, lies and BS are constitutionally protected free political/commercial speech. Nobody files lawsuits. Nothing can and/or should be done about it because (i) congress no longer governs due to gridlock, and (ii) regardless of chronic congressional constipation, difficulty in governing is baked into the constitution and the constitution protects it. Leave it alone.
That's a rational, reasonable argument. Reasonable, that is, if one wants to stay with irrational politics based on objectively false reality and flawed common sense.
Maybe nothing can be done. However, there's no prohibition on bringing this up to inform the public about it over and over and over. Cognitive science is clear: repetition often works for breathing life into both truth and outrageous BS or lies.
One final point. Zakaria writes: “This [BS] has been Trump’s mode all his life. He boasts — and boasts and boasts — about his business, his buildings, his books, his wives. Much of it is a concoction of hyperbole and falsehoods. And when he’s found out, he’s like that guy we have all met at a bar who makes wild claims but when confronted with the truth, quickly responds, ‘I knew that!’ . . . . Harry Frankfurt concludes that liars and truth-tellers are both acutely aware of facts and truths. They are just choosing to play on opposite sides of the same game to serve their own ends. The B.S. artist, however, has lost all connection with reality. He pays no attention to the truth. ‘By virtue of this’, Frankfurt writes, ‘bullshit is a greater enemy of truth than lies are.’ ”
So, are Frankfurt and Zakaria right to argue that BS is a greater enemy of truth than lies? Or, is it irrelevant because politics is so hopelessly mired in fantasy and irrational nonsense that it makes no difference?
B&B orig: 8/10/16
Lies & BS in politics
The issue of politicians, business people and the mainstream media lying to the American people is a hot issue in the 2016 elections. Lying to the American people can take several forms, the most obvious is a statement of fact that is false. The speaker may or may not know of or care about the falsity. Other kinds of lies include (i) withholding facts that undermine or contradict public statements, and (ii) taking actions that undermine or contradict public statements. None of the foregoing kinds of lies is illegal, unless a line is crossed, e.g., a politician inciting violence or treason, or false advertising by a business.
No one denies that politicians lie. One conservative commentator writing for The Federalist put it this way: “Politicians break their promises and modify their positions all the time, of course. They BS us about their opinions and carefully craft identities that are palatable to the average voter. When a person enters this political universe, we need accept that most of the things we hear are, at best, poetic truths. But, yet, there is still a big difference between BSing and lying– though the latter is . . . . pardonable if you happen to be lying for the cause.”
According to the Urban Dictionary, BSing happens “when someone has no f***ing clue what they are talking about, yet insists on trying to get others to believe him/her.” Apparently, that accords with how academia sees the lies vs. BS difference.
Given pipartisan bitterness, some historical context is appropriate.
The founding Fathers and the 1787 Constitutional Convention: The Constitutional Convention took place over about 4 months in 1787 in Philadelphia. The public was told that the Convention was convened to fix the Articles of Confederation. However, key founders including Washington, Madison, Adams and Hamilton wanted to replace the Articles as America’s political operating system with a new form of government.
The delegates elected George Washington to preside. Washington’s rules were that (1) Madison would take notes, (2) the delegates were not allowed to leak any of the proceedings and debate to the press or public, and (3) at the end of the convention, Madison’s notes would be burned and never seen by the public. Washington knew that if the public were fully informed of the proceedings as they developed, opponents would be able to sway public opinion against the new Constitution. Instead, the public would be presented with a completed Constitution that they could accept or reject. Sixteen of the 55 participating delegates refused to sign the final document because they disagreed with the new form of government it embodied.
That is an example of politicians, the founding Fathers, saying or doing one thing in private or among themselves and saying (or doing) contrary things to the public. The founders were lying to the American people, not BSing them. At least, they knew exactly what they were doing.
There are many other examples of US politicians lying to the American people.
F.D.R. & World War II: In his 1940 run for re-election, F.D.R.’s campaign relied heavily on promises to keep America out of World War II. For example, F.D.R. said this on October 30, 1940: “I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.” Despite that, a F.D.R. sympathizer (a Stanford historian) justified his deception this way: “Franklin Roosevelt repeatedly deceived the American people during the period before Pearl Harbor ... He was like the physician who must tell the patient lies for the patient's own good.”
F.D.R.’s inner circle was aware of his intentions because many of his actions before Pearl Harbor actively fostered (probably forced) US entry into the war.
Lyndon Johnson & the Vietnam War: Before US entry into the Vietnam War, President Johnson lied the American people about a non-existent attack on a US Naval vessel in the Gulf of Tonkin that was falsely asserted to have occurred on August 4, 1964. An attack on a US vessel did occur two days earlier, but the second attack was fabricated for public consumption to generate support for US entry into a Vietnam War.
The cigarette industry’s lies: Lies to the public were routinely used for decades to sell cigarettes. For legal and public relations reasons, the industry “continues to deny that it is clear that smoking causes lung cancer.” Other industry lies include denial of cigarette addiction despite knowing “since the 1960s that the crucial selling point of its product is the chemical dependence of its customers.”
Mitt Romney & the 2012 campaign: Romney told a private campaign donor audience that Obama’s supporters would vote for Obama “no matter what”, arguing that they account for 47% of voters and therefore he did not “worry about those people.” That’s an example of a candidate saying one thing to one audience (rich donors) and never saying it to the American people.
The 2016 presidential election: Hillary Clinton is under fire for saying different things to the public and private audiences and other kinds of lies. That’s like Romney and the Founding Fathers. Fact checkers show that Trump lies much more than Clinton. What, if any qualitative or quantitative differences between the two are there? How is the average American to judge the differences in terms of fitness for elected office?
If nothing else, it should help to put lying or BSing to the public in at least some (not complete) context. It’s not even clear if lying is worse than BSing. At least with the liar, they know the truth. The BSer just doesn’t care. There’s one difference between Clinton and Trump. Clinton isn’t nearly as much a a BSer as Trump is.
Does being a less frequent liar vs. a more frequent liar/BSer make a meaningful difference? Is Lying better, worse or about the same relative to BSing? Or, does lying and/or BSing 'for the cause' justify misleading the American public making Clinton and Trump about the same?
B&B orig: 10/16/16
No comments:
Post a Comment