Common Description:
Read the passage carefully and answer the THREE questions that follow.
Comprehension: What bullshit essentially misrepresents is neither the state of affairs to which it refers nor the beliefs of the speaker concerning that state of affairs. Those are what lies misrepresent, by virtue of being false. Since bullshit need not be false, it differs from lies in its misrepresentational intent. The bullshitter may not deceive us, or even intend to do so, either about the facts or about what he takes the facts to be. What he does necessarily attempt to deceive us about is his enterprise. His only indispensably distinctive characteristic is that in a certain way he misrepresents what he is up to. This is the crux of the distinction between him and the liar. Both he and the liar represent themselves falsely as endeavoring to communicate the truth. The success of each depends upon deceiving us about that. But the fact about himself that the liar hides is that he is attempting to lead us away from a correct apprehension of reality; we are not to know that he wants us to believe something he supposes to be false. The fact about himself that the bullshitter hides, on the other hand, is that the truth-values of his statements are of no central interest to him; what we are not to understand is that his intention is neither to report the truth nor to conceal it. This does not mean that his speech is anarchically impulsive, but that the motive guiding and controlling it is unconcerned with how the things about which he speaks truly are. It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false.
Which of the following statements can be BEST inferred from the passage?
B
Step-by-Step Solution
Key idea: This is an inference question testing the ability to identify the common denominator in the author's philosophical distinction between two concepts.
Step 1: Analyze the passage's definition of the liar. The liar attempts to lead us away from reality and hides the fact that they want us to believe something false.
Step 2: Analyze the passage's definition of the bullshitter. The bullshitter hides the fact that truth-values are of no central interest to them; their intention is neither to report nor conceal truth.
Step 3: Identify the shared trait. The passage explicitly states: "Both he and the liar represent themselves falsely as endeavoring to communicate the truth. The success of each depends upon deceiving us about that."
Step 4: Evaluate Option A. The passage states bullshit "need not be false," so saying both "misrepresent the truth" is inaccurate for the bullshitter, who may accidentally say something true.
Step 5: Evaluate Option B. Both intend to deceive us about their enterprise/intent (the liar about their goal to mislead, the bullshitter about their indifference to truth). This matches the text perfectly.
Step 6: Evaluate Option C. The bullshitter is explicitly "unconcerned with how the things about which he speaks truly are," so they are not guided by the truth.
Step 7: Evaluate Option D. "Living in their own worlds" is a vague metaphor not supported by the precise philosophical definitions provided.
Step 8: Evaluate Option E. The liar is bound by the conviction of knowing the truth (to lie about it), so they are not entirely unbound by conviction.
Answer: Option B.