If you hold the preconceived notion that a book titled with a curse word could be a ploy to grab your attention, that a Princeton professor analyzing the word ‘bulls***’ is absurd, or that publishing an essay that took little over thirty minutes to read within what looks like a hardcover novel is deceiving, you are right. 

Princeton philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt’s essay “On Bulls***” is, for lack of a better word, bulls***. The seemingly carefully crafted essay Frankfurt constructed in 2005 first comes off as a research article, but slowly develops its own rhetoric of bulls***, all in attempt to answer one fundamental question; what is bulls***? 

By initially posing philosophical questions as to what bulls*** is, Frankfurt sets up the reader to understand his own bulls***. 

Frankfurt makes a suggestion that a decrease in religion has led humans to cut corners, while in the past it was commonplace to believe human judgment mattered less than what a god saw at all times. He makes an attempt to question whether bulls*** can be accurately defined, and answers these questions within his own rhetoric more than the literal context of his work.

Cleverly comparing the definition of “bulls***,” “bull,” and “humbug,” to lying, Frankfurt defines bulls*** as separate from lying, but not a whole truth. 

By way of deception and reason, Frankfurt fits his own definition, once concluding that “the problem with understanding why our attitude toward bulls*** is generally more benign than our attitude toward lying is an important one, which I shall leave as an exercise for the reader.”

Through cunning and wit, Frankfurt admits his own bulls*** while tacitly asking why bulls*** is seen as a safe alternative to lying, while more closely aligning itself with truth without backing. 

In providing an “exercise of bulls***,” Frankfurt explains, “feelings of anger nor foolishness came to me, but rather discontent and boredom.” 

It is not to say that Frankfurt’s presentation lacks wit and humor, but upon realizing the book’s motives are founded upon wit rather than research, personal attempts to cut through Frankfurt’s bull present the problem with bulls***, and its contrast to the truth. It is unfounded. 

Just as he implies, Frankfurt provides few sources, letting his own rhetoric guide readers’ thoughts and purposefully drawing a fine line between reality and bulls***. 

Beyond the words on the page, the book’s presentation is a fitting interpretation of bulls***. Within a small red square upon a black hardcover, the title and author are printed in simple, professional type, implying a serious study unlike the clever narrative within.

Words on the already-small pages are spaced so wide, with inch-wide margins so as to create a deceiving page count; 67 pages to read easily under an hour.

Frankfurt seems to make a larger point; just because someone has credentials, doesn’t mean they know what they’re talking about and people who are sure of themselves can be more dangerous than an unsure theorist. 

“On Bulls***” is a good, short read for those in the mood for comedy with underlying purpose, leaving bulls***ters and hard workers alike to ask, “is it bulls*** if we can’t tell the difference?”