Fernando Flores on Bullshitting:

I think people should think about on what is to give an opinion. Written language is more reflective than oral language. In oral language people tend to give fewer reasons on what they are saying. In the written language people give more reasons, about the things they say. It is a much deeper phenomenon, it is the ontological discussion between statements and judgments. People do not know that opinions belong to the family of judgments and therefore they cannot ask for evidence to settle them. On the other hand, affirmations can be settled through evidence. Every time we make a judgment we risk something. If you said that a person is talking bullshit, people can ask you, ‘why did you say that? And if you don’t have an answer, you will appear to be the “bullshitter.”

The bullshitter is the person who talks and is not careful with what he or she is saying, but that’s not the same as being a liar. Bullshit says things as real without checking if they are true, they don’t care if that is going to affect others; it build castles in the air. The judgment of the liar is different, because the liar does give false statements knowing they are false. This is a failure of sincerity.

An example of this is the Google and China issue. Several people have judged Google, as if judging is the main matter. I believe that what is relevant is the fact itself and the recognition of it as an ethic dilemma. It is not an easy decision to abandon China. China, as any nation, has a principle of sovereignty therefore you have to negotiate trade agreements the best way possible. Anyway that’s good for China. I dare to say this now, as I had formed this opinion through all the discussion. Before, my opinion might have been a quick reaction. Quick reactions can become negative judgment.

The bull shittter makes careless promises, careless statements, (without evidence) but they dont have the deceit of the liars. It also happens with promises which cannot be denied through evidence, there’s always a gap, in the moment a promise is made and in the moment the promise gets achieved. If the gap is not defined ahead, that takes you into a bullshitter attitude. There is also the liar who makes promises knowing beforehand that he has no intention of achieving them.

Language has two components, one part of language represents reality and other part has to do with inventing worlds with another. The invention of worlds is done through offers, promises, requests, and statements. When a post is written, what the person is really doing is offering, promising, requesting and declaring. These conversations open the possibilities of building a collective world together. When these four actions are made carelessly (without evidence) and like biased opinions, they do not contribute to build a world together.

This beautifully defines the current state of ‘conversations’  taking place almost everywhere around the web.

Monetization, rather than generating value, has taken center-stage, while clearly it’s only value that can drive money.

The whole interview can be found here:

Global Voices Online » Reflections on Blogging with Fernando Flores.