Read these two articles on Trump’s bullshit:
Graham, “What Trump Did in Osaka Was Worse Than Lying” (The Atlantic)
Yglesias, “The Bullshitter-in-Chief” (Vox)
Pick one of the highlighted examples from one of these sources that you believe is not a case of bullshit even though the author has identified it as bullshit.
(a) Write an introduction that clearly states your thesis. That is, write an introduction that states specifically what position you are going to be defending in your paper.
(b) In the first paragraph of the body of your paper, explain Henry Frankfurt’s basic analysis of bullshit. Identify each of the three necessary conditions for bullshit and explain each condition. Don’t forget to illustrate Frankfurt’s analysis with an example.
(c) Then write a paragraph explaining how bullshit differs from lying. You don’t need to provide a full analysis of lying (of the sort you did in your analysis paper) to do this. Just focus on the specific differences between bullshitting and lying.
(d) For the final paragraph of the body of your paper, explain the example you selected and offer your reasons for thinking that, contrary what the author says, the example is not actually a case of bullshit (in Frankfurt’s sense). Further, if you think that Trump is actually lying in the example, argue that he is; and if you think that Trump is not lying in the example, argue that he isn’t.
(e) Finish your paper draft with a conclusion that restates your thesis and offers an explanation for the author’s mistake.

Sample Solution

Share on Facebook

Tweet

Follow us