The Bullshit Abstract: From Critique to Reflexive Practice

Academics use the abstract to summarize and communicate a research paper’s focus, methods, findings, and conclusions. However, not all abstracts are convincing. Many are bland, uninspired, or outright stupid, as authors do not always know what they want to say or how to communicate complex research in the space of a few hundred words. They hence often convey the kind of “intelligent stupidity,” which Robert Musil (1937) said could hardly be “distinguished from talent, progress, hope or improvement.” By implication, abstracts are prone to contain and perpetuate “academic bullshit” (Frankfurt 2005), broadly understood as forms of academic expression that meet the stylistic academic standards but generate content that is deceptive, doubtful, or irrelevant. Taking this inherent disposition towards bullshit in the academic abstract as its entry point, this paper presents ten self-authored “bullshit abstracts,” which draw inspiration from various academic fields. Far from denouncing bullshit outright, it acknowledges the inevitable character of bullshit in academic writing (Eubanks and Schaeffer 2008). It urges academics to reflexively consider, and perform, their roles as researchers and writers in view of the challenges they face today, such as reputation management and the pressure in academia to publish or perish; and their complete lack of sensitivity to the odorous aspects of writing.