Bullshit

From an academic standpoint, bullshit is a form of communication characterized by an indifference to the truth, distinct from lying, which actively seeks to conceal the truth. In his influential 1986 essay On Bullshit, philosopher Harry Frankfurt provided the foundational modern academic definition. He argued that the bullshitter is not an opponent of the truth, but simply disregards it, fabricating claims to suit a particular purpose, such as to impress or persuade an audience.

Subsequent academic research has expanded on Frankfurt’s work, leading to various typologies of bullshit grounded in philosophy, psychology, and sociology.

Philosophical and psychological types Academics have refined Frankfurt’s definition by focusing on the bullshitter’s intent, the nature of the communication, and the audience’s role.

Frankfurt-bullshit: The classic form described by Frankfurt, defined by the speaker’s indifference to truth. The motive is not to deceive about the facts, but to manipulate the audience’s opinion by misrepresenting one’s own relationship to the facts.
Cohen-bullshit (or “unclarifiable unclarity”): In a critique of Frankfurt, philosopher G. A. Cohen identified a type of academic bullshit that consists of statements that are not only obscure but also impossible to clarify. This type of intentional obscurantism is used to impress or lend spurious weight to a claim, and is often found in academic texts where a sincere but confused person might repeat the nonsense unintentionally.
Pseudo-profound bullshit: A type of meaningless or empty statement constructed to sound insightful or deep. Studies in psychology show that individuals more receptive to this type of bullshit tend to be less reflective and more prone to holding religious, paranormal, and conspiratorial beliefs.
Negligent bullshit: Defined as assertions made with a blamably insufficient deference to the truth, or a “culpable intellectual negligence”. Unlike the indifferent Frankfurtian bullshitter, the negligent bullshitter may not actively intend to deceive but simply fails to properly attend to their “epistemic duties” or to properly check their facts.

Sociological and organizational types Sociologists have examined bullshit not as an individual failing but as a social practice tied to specific communities and structures.

Social practice bullshit: This view argues that bullshitting is a language game accepted and encouraged within specific social communities, such as corporate or academic settings. The goal is not deception but participation—to fit in, get things done, and reinforce one’s identity within the group. For example, a manager might use corporate jargon they don’t fully understand simply because “everyone knows that it’s bullshit, but it’s accepted”.
Bullshit jobs: Anthropologist David Graeber used Frankfurt’s concept to argue that modern capitalism has created millions of socially useless and existentially meaningless “bullshit jobs”. The bullshit is inherent to the job itself, where workers are forced to perform tasks they believe are pointless to justify their role.
Graeber identified five types of bullshit jobs:
- Flunkies: Workers who exist to make their superior feel important.
- Goons: Aggressive gatekeepers who defend against competitors, such as lobbyists or corporate lawyers.
- Duct-tapers: Employees who fix problems caused by organizational dysfunction.
- Box-tickers: Workers who exist primarily to create the appearance that something is being done.
- Taskmasters: Managers who create extra work for their subordinates to justify their own existence.
Evasive vs. persuasive bullshit: Psychological research has explored the function of bullshit. Persuasive bullshit is used to impress others with false claims of knowledge or competence. Evasive bullshit, in contrast, is a strategy used to avoid an uncomfortable situation by providing irrelevant truths instead of a direct answer, such as replying to a question about a bad gift with “This is so thoughtful of you”.