"In it, the highly-respected moral philosopher draws a clear distinction between lying and BSing- the first being an act of conscious deceit, the latter describing any form of communication intended to persuade without due regard for truth. And contrary to a liar (who knows they're hiding the truth), it was the bullshitter-that person for whom concepts like deceit and truthfulness are essentially irrelevant-who emerges as the more insidious."
"With tedious frequency, one finds oneself dragged involuntarily into a type of discount business supermarket filled with self-important, AI-flavored quasi-wisdom packaged up into oracular mini-bites. If one looks at any recent study that now describes clicks as LinkedIn's primary survival currency, it's reasonable to assume that these nuggets are designed less to improve the reader's professional prospects than they are simply to gain that all-important engagement flicker."
A moral philosopher's distinction between lying and BSing highlights that much online persuasion occurs without regard for truth. Communication that disregards truthfulness can be more insidious than conscious deceit because sincerity and truth lose relevance. Social platforms enable rapid spread of insincere content and foster demand for bite-sized, surface-level wisdom. LinkedIn specifically hosts abundant pseudo-coaching, AI-flavored quasi-wisdom and oracular mini-bites crafted to attract clicks. Engagement metrics and algorithmic incentives encourage shallow content designed to trigger reactions rather than improve professional prospects, reinforcing a cycle where visibility often trumps veracity.
Read at Inc
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]