By Lilly Sandoval
The question of reducing bullshit in contemporary discourse seems a bit daunting but I’d like to think of it in the sense that we should begin speaking as if we were writing a paper. If more people would speak with purpose or the things they care about it would help reduce the amount of bullshit that occurs. Although it may seem excessive, if we began asking others where they got their information from or whether they’ve experienced it themselves. When regarding Frankfurt’s specific notion of bullshit, it’s more a concern of how do we get others to want the same. We as a people need to see the negative effects that bullshitting has on society, not only within homes,classrooms and the office but within our nation as a whole. The video displayed in Thursday’s afternoon session mentioned how it’s often used in politics, which can be hazardous and misleading to the general public. By acknowledging it as a n issue together we can begin to take steps towards lessening its use.
Throughout Unit 2 there were many questions that came up, but one that was very puzzling was hrönir, in Borges reading. It didn’t seem like a legitimate idea, honestly seemed like it was leading into the BS section. However I wondered if hrönir was the same thing as dejavu, or correlated with it? I ask this because the example given makes it seem like there is a shared common knowledge of where the coins were lost and retrieved. How do the others know this, and how are the items replicated ? Some speculations I had on the topic were that maybe there were parallel universes or the idea of one’s past selves. Since the example given on page 27 was that X=Y and Y=Z, then Z finds coins because he remembers X lost them . It still leaves me bewildered because there was another idea offered about pantheistic realism- one individual exists and is indivisible who is composed of every one of the separate beings in the universe. What is the easiest explanation for hrönir?