The author is a moral philosophy professor and the entire book reads like a tongue in cheek philosophy lecture. You can tell that Frankfurt is very amused by his own cleverness but I found the whole thing a bit dull. Learning about the etymology and changing definitions over time was interesting but it was written in an overly academic style I find stuffy and unapproachable.

Wow, this was terrible. I should have listened to the other reviewers. Frankfurt spent a good deal of time just deciding what "bullshit" is. I hope he never tries to write a dictionairy. We'd have international ink shortages before he made it through the As. "Asshole" would probably hang him up for volumes.

Philosophical talk about bullshit! I read and read, with an expectation that the author would be want to change the subject or turn it to metaphorical or political points, but he doesn't....
He still talks and bluffs and analyses the bullshit, till the essay is ended with amazing result of dismantling and taking apart the literal word of bullshit and it's meaning.
Is that sound bullshit to you?

This book is really bad, yet still deserves 3 stars, and gets a unique triple rating from me: "thrown aside," "crap" and "must re-read." I think they are all well deserved. I'd give it a fourth star since it made me think and that's worth something, but it's only bullshit after all.

Admittedly, much of my relationship with bullshit is focused on recent policital experiences. Thinking about it (you actually should, that's part of the point) I'll go for a simple definition: uncloaked lies. The point is that you tell an untruth with a wink and a quick flash of pulling away the fig leaf (love that metaphor) so that nobody can say you didn't warn them. Thus legally, such things aren't lies since the "just bullshitting" moniker disavows serious intent to deceive. However, *right behind that* is the quite evil actual simultaneous intent to get away with it, often because the fig leaf is meant to be sufficient. This way you can have your cake and eat it: "Imagine your grandma gives you $10 and your Mom takes $7. Would you still do your chores?!" (that's a paraphrase) "Who's gonna pay for the Wall? Mexico, 100%." (that's a damn quote) So we should just accept things as casual talk & discount them? Hmm. Ok, then, what about the tweet to launch the nukes? Devaluation of communication is the negative consequence of bullshit. "Harmless bullshit?" No such thing. There, I've gone from humor to doomsday in two sentences, so I'll desist.

The book however, though just a little pamphlet, still fails to achieve brevity or clarity. It seems to have been written as much or more to illustrate its topic as to explain it. That is, you have to peel away the bullshit encrusted shrubbery of obfuscation (eew, wash your hands after) in order to get to the points. That's too bad because it's a funny topic, but Franfurt, a philosopher, is unable to access focused, incisive language. Indeed too thick a layer of concealing textual compost creates a faint revealing scent and that caused me to suspect I was being bullshat (dibs) all along. But no, my judgment is it was sincere, and indeed humorous, but only if diabolically complex sentence structure and unnecessary vocabulary sets you giggling, which it usually does me, so that's saying something. ...bad. ...about both me and "On Bullshit."