Anthony Pendino

The subject of deceptive speech is something that has caught my interest ever since it was introduced in my Philosophy and Culture class from the Fall 2021 semester at Dawson. Due to it being a philosophy course, the class only discussed this topic to a limited extent, though enough to get me interest in the topic.

In his essay, "On Bullshit," Princeton professor Harry Frankfurt discusses the meaning and use of this form of speech. Reading this essay helped me better understand the topic and made me more aware of ways that language can be used to manipulate others. This type of communication, that which is purposely deceptive and cunning, is very common. We are being lied to, in one way or another, almost every day of our lives. This technique and many others, such as doublespeak, embellishment, and flat out lying, are all part of deceptive speech. They are used to manipulate others for many reasons and are very effective.

I'd like to write an essay about this topic because I believe it is a rich subject on which I can find a lot of useful information and research articles. I'm also attracted to the topic because it is not something that is often discussed. Though its effects and use are so common, many do not have a lot of knowledge on deceptive speech.

Frankfurt, Harry G. On Bullshit. Princeton University Press, 2005.

It is well known that politicians lie all the time and it is unwise to believe everything they say. While this is true, many do not exactly why many political speeches are untrustworthy. Furthermore, many do not know what politicians aim to do in their speeches and what makes them so effective.

In my research, I found a very interesting and informative YouTube video by CNN Business. The video, titled "Why politicians lie," does a very good job at explaining why it is vital for politicians to be dishonest. I learned a lot about how politicians manipulate their speech in the slightest ways to move sneakily around the truth and avoid getting caught in difficult situations. The video is from 2016, so it presents examples from the Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump presidential campaign.

I'd like to focus this essay on how exactly politicians use deceptive speech to manipulate their audiences for political gain. I'd like to analyze real speeches by famous politicians and find examples of the type of speech discussed. I would also like to analyze the real-world consequences of the speeches analyzed in the essay. I think a good idea would be to look at how speeches may have impacted important votes or major decisions such as presidential elections and bills. Also, a sort of expectation vs. reality aspect might be interesting where I analyze a politician's promises in comparison to what really happened or came into effect.

CNN Business. "Why politicians lie." YouTube, October 14, 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0bl3CaHZnQ.

Harry Frankfurt's book On Bullshit was written in 2005. In it, he contemplates the idea of lying and deception in its many forms. One such form is bullshit, he tries to define it and distinguish it from other forms of lying and deceit. In doing this, however, he provides me with great thoughts and ideas about the philosophical nature of lying and bullshitting. What I enjoyed the most from this book is how he goes about defining the term. Frankfurt explores in great detail what lying is, what makes lying different from bullshitting, and many more philosophical ideas surrounding the topic. Frankfurt wrote this book as a philosophical piece, in an attempt to provide the world with a definition of something we encounter every day. His discussions in the book are intertwined with aspects of human nature, which I find very interesting.

Frankfurt's On Bullshit will certainly be very useful for my research project as it gives philosophical insight to lying and deception. I think this will mix in nicely with the research/scholarly articles I use, as well as the more historical pieces. I think it fills a void for an aspect I was missing in my sources, the more contemplative side of the subject. With research sources, I can use statistics to prove a point, with historical sources, I can use real-life examples of the past to make a point, and with a philosophical source, I can use a macro lens to take a step back and talk about what it really means to lie or deceive. Though it is a philosophy book, Frankfurt's writing is easy to understand and his ideas get through clearly without the use of excessive jargon.

Frankfurt, Harry G. On Bullshit. New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 2005.

George Orwell's 1984 is one of the most famous novels in all of English literature. 1984 falls into the categories of science fiction, political science, and social science. The novel tells Winston Smith's experience as a thought criminal in a dystopian world in which everything is controlled by the government, or The Party, including thoughts and truth. The book contains a compelling story, but is also deeply philosophical and tries to say so much about the importance of truth among many things. 1984 is a historically important book and is seen as a piece of art to look back at and learn from due to its constant relevancy within society. It is not only the story of a man being persecuted for his thoughts within an authoritarian regime, but it is a warning about how our actions as a society may lead us down the wrong path.

I do not expect to make constant and drawn-out references to 1984 in my paper. I do, however, believe that it can be very useful to me as a way of showing how deception can be used for political power. I most likely will not be referencing any particular parts of the story. Instead, I will draw on passages from the more philosophical aspects of the book. For example, Winston's description of the Party's regime or when O'Brien gives a very detailed explanation about how the Party maintains its power and will do so until the end of time through manipulation of the truth and mass deception. There are many parallels between this book and the arguments in my paper so I think it is a natural fit. I will certainly be able to work references to 1984 into my paper as evidence to reinforce my arguments. I also wanted to use this book as a source because I know that it is a popular book that has a deep real-world history in places such as the USSR, where it was, for a long time, prohibited to read 1984. In my eyes, the novel exists as proof of many of the arguments I am making in my paper.

Orwell, George. 1984. London, Penguin Books, 2008.

I selected this source because it relates well to some of the main ideas I would like to cover in my paper. It provides real-life evidence of lying on behalf of the government that was done to change the public's view of the war on drugs in America. I like this source because it takes the form of a scientific study because it analyzes all the times that the Office of National Drug Control Policy lied to the public. The most important and useful parts of the source for my paper are the statistics of how many times false claims were made and the findings of how the ONDCP used dishonest statistics.

I think this book can be used as a great example to support the case being presented in my paper. Real-life uses of manipulative speech and false claims like these help reinforce my argument and show that it is a real thing. I do not know much about the politics of the drug war in America, so it was interesting to read parts of the book and learn about this part of history. What I learned about this part of recent history is that the title of "Drug War" or "War on Drugs" by the American government is very much a façade for deeper political aspirations under the surface. Furthermore, much of what was done to stop the use and import of drugs in the United States was done to satisfy motives beyond the cessation of drug use. All the while, however, the American government was able to provide false statistics and lie to the public to make sure that they thought their tax money was going towards a good cause, and not towards political gain in South American countries.

Robinson, Matthew B. and Renee G. Scherlen. Lies, Damned Lies, and Drug War Statistics. Albany, State University of New York Press, 2014.

I found this source when researching examples to use for my final research paper. I wanted to include something that was fairly contemporary and that pertained to North American politics so it would be more relatable to the audience and more exemplary of how politics works in our world. I had already known and learned about the Watergate scandal previously, but this book was still very informative and taught me a lot about the details of the event. It also provided me with good examples and evidence to use in my paper. Skimming through the different chapters was very interesting. The book goes step-by-step through the events of the scandal, with one chapter covering each in detail. The chapters also follow the events in chronological order so it helped me build a better understanding of the situation. I usually find political/bureaucratical battles in history boring but it did not seem like a drag when reading through the book.

I eventually landed on the chapter titled "A Presidential Counterattack." I thought this chapter would be useful for my paper because it is a move on the president's part in which he flat out lies about multiple things. It was clear to me that this would be the chapter that would be useful because, as the title suggests, a politician is using bureaucracy like a weapon, something that is sure to include some sort of lying and/or deception. I only realized after choosing this source that I could have focused more on American politics when choosing the topic or path for my final paper. I decided to stick to deception in politics as a whole but I think that focusing on American politicians would have been interesting. The opportunity presented itself a little too late, however, for many of my other sources to fit into the final paper.

Hosansky, David. "Eyewitness to Watergate." Washington, D.C., CQ Press, 2007.