Sin sentido

Summary: Frankfurt takes the position that a deplorable mistake would be unleashed abroad if there should develop in today's world a widespread lack of caring for the value and importance of truth. He finds a disregard for truth endemic among publicists and politicians, but he has discovered a similar attitude growing among authors. Frankfurt works with a broad canvas here, averring, A society that is recklessly and persistently remiss in supporting and encouraging truth is bound to decline. Without an appreciation for truth, humans can not consider themselves--take pride in themselves--as rational animals, separate from other animals in that regard. The author is an emeritus professor of philosophy at Princeton, and despite its brevity, this provocative meditation is not light reading. --Brad Hooper Copyright 2006 Booklist

Don't read this, read On Bullshit instead, which is a powerful essay. This book is well written, concise, and well reasoned, but it doesn't bring anything new to the table philosophically. He basically reiterates Plato, who argued that to be in touch with reality is a metadrive of humanity.

Also, why is Spinoza listed as one of the authors??? HE DIED IN 1677!

I said "Eh" about On Bullshit and here too, I find myself saying "Eh." Kind of interesting, and I can't complain about the investment of time. Also sort of rambling, not easy to get through, and some of the points are kind of self-evident.

Truth is good

Truth is based on faithful conveyance of the best available examination of reproducible facts, preferably those that have predictive, curative, or restorative value. Truth is useful. Truth is necessary to commerce. Truth is fundamemtal to safety, sanity, and security. Spinoza, Kant, Montaine, Rich, and others had things to say about truth. This book takes far too many pages to say these simple things.

I don't consider this book a full philosophical treatise on truth, but rather a short taste of what truth is about, much like Sam Harris's "On Lying", although not as good. I enjoyed reading this, but I felt like this was all pretty common knowledge with very few original thoughts or takes. When I sit down with a short book like this, I do not expect it to be dense, rather, I expect it to be enjoyable - and this one was.

Frankfurt's basic point seems to be that pragmatically speaking, we need there to be such a thing as truth. Not the one great truth, just simple truth i.e., the ground is wet or the towel is dry. We need there to be such a thing as truth (as opposed to all things being relative) in order to make informed, fact-based decisions. I agree with the sentiment, but I don't think it merits a 101 page essay.

Annoin vain kolme tähteä, koska odotukset olivat On Bullshitin (suom. Paskapuheesta) jälkeen todella kovat, joten tuli lievä – mutta vain lievä – pettymys. Kirja ei ole varsinaisesti huono, mutta se ei tarjonnut samanlaisia uusia oivalluksia kuin Paskapuheesta.

Kirja on oivaa vastalääkettä postmodernille "ei ole yhtä totuutta" -mantralle. Ja Shakespearen runoon pohjautuva esimerkki tilanteesta jossa kaksi ihmistä rakastaa toisiaan ja molemmat valehtelevat toisilleen ja molemmat tietävät tämän on kiva twisti muuten totuudenpuhumisen puolesta argumentoivaan kirjaan.

As much as I like "On Bullshit", what really works about it is not its "irreverence" because it's not exactly irreverent, at least on its topic, but its built-in limits and focus. Bullshit is its own particular thing, so putting a frame around it really work.

Truth though...well, what do you even talk about when the subject is the full history and breadth of philosophy? And how do you winnow it down into something manageable? Well, the truth is, you can't. Or I can't, but neither can Harry Frankfurt.

The issue begins with two failures upfront. He begins with a misread (willful or otherwise) of postmodernism. I think it's directly false to claim that postmodernists basically argued that there is no truth, or that truth is in the eye of the beholder. Postmodernism is the interrogation of power and especially the power of language. So it's not saying that truth is in the eye of the beholder, but that systems of power influence or sometimes control the nature of truth through the exercise of power. Truth is contained within competing discourses. So the fact that Frankfurt finds himself within one of those discourses, Western education/society/culture, doesn't mean that he isn't demonstrating the very thing he's supposedly critiquing.

The other issue is that Frankfurt basically defines truth in three ways: factuality (something no one really disputes), consensus (again, see postmodernism), and by refencing as many different philosophers discuss "truth", well at least in English. Even just discussing different definitions of truth within specific cultural contexts would have made this more interesting.

7. bölümü hariç, pek bullshit. sanki yazar bir önceki kitabıyla bunu tanımlamış gibi. (gerçi daha okumadım onu.)yani bu derece kısa bir kitap, ve özetleseniz daha dörtte üçü okham'ın tanrılarına kurban edilecek gibi.

7. bölüme ise şuradan ulaşabilirsiniz:

http://emrergin.tumblr.com/post/38406...

An ok read. Frankfurt goes into an essay on the different components of "truth", and the many importances of the truth that are integral to how we function on interpersonal, individual, and societal levels.

Never really provided information that WOW'ed me, but was generally interesting as a whole. The book truly did shed some light on the "truth".

"If you like On Bullshit"

Without realizing it, I have become a fan of Prof. Harry G. Frankfurt's work, especially since "The Reasons of Love", "Taking Ourselves Seriously And Getting It Right", to the little gem "On Bullshit", I am enticed by not only the clarity of thoughts but the encouragement of virtues and noble motives. "On Truth" is another tiny book like "On Bullshit", after a reading of it, it could even be named as a continuation of the latter. From the point of view as a general reader rather than a specialized philosophy student (which of us in essence can be named as non-philosophy student, we are all "livers" of lives and so cannot avoid learning and contemplating issues that comes with breathing and consciousness, or the loss of it), the title of "On Truth" has easily led us to expect answers pertaining to the big question about the meaning of life - the truth in life. Frankfurt, instead, has prepared a discourse focusing on the same path as the discussion in "On Bullshit" about truth as that in honesty, yes as yes, no as no. I have still learned a great deal from this little book and enjoyed it; I can also understand the trend of a lower rating from other readers when expectation (be it unrealistic, be it misguided) was not met.