What do you think?
Rate this book
Assholes: A Theory
The perfect graduation gift for every young adult entering the real world.
In the New York Times bestseller Nick Hornby calls “helpful, stimulating, and very timely” ( The Believer ), philosopher Aaron James presents a theory of the asshole that is both intellectually provocative and existentially necessary.
What does it mean for someone to be an asshole? The answer is not obvious, despite the fact that we are often personally stuck dealing with people for whom there is no better name. Try as we might to avoid them, assholes are found everywhere and in multiple iterations: smug assholes, royal assholes, the presidential asshole, corporate assholes, reckless assholes. The list goes on.
Asshole management begins with asshole understanding. Much as Machiavelli illuminated political strategy for princes, this book finally gives us the concepts to think or say why assholes disturb us so, and explains why such people seem part of the human social condition, especially in an age of raging narcissism and unbridled capitalism. These concepts are also practically useful, as understanding the asshole we are stuck with helps us think constructively about how to handle problems he (and they are mostly all men) presents. We get a better sense of when the asshole is best resisted, and when he is best ignored—a better sense of what is, and what is not, worth fighting for.
In the New York Times bestseller Nick Hornby calls “helpful, stimulating, and very timely” ( The Believer ), philosopher Aaron James presents a theory of the asshole that is both intellectually provocative and existentially necessary.
What does it mean for someone to be an asshole? The answer is not obvious, despite the fact that we are often personally stuck dealing with people for whom there is no better name. Try as we might to avoid them, assholes are found everywhere and in multiple iterations: smug assholes, royal assholes, the presidential asshole, corporate assholes, reckless assholes. The list goes on.
Asshole management begins with asshole understanding. Much as Machiavelli illuminated political strategy for princes, this book finally gives us the concepts to think or say why assholes disturb us so, and explains why such people seem part of the human social condition, especially in an age of raging narcissism and unbridled capitalism. These concepts are also practically useful, as understanding the asshole we are stuck with helps us think constructively about how to handle problems he (and they are mostly all men) presents. We get a better sense of when the asshole is best resisted, and when he is best ignored—a better sense of what is, and what is not, worth fighting for.
240 pages, Paperback
First published December 4, 2012
1029 people are currently reading
8635 people want to read
About the author
Aaron James
30 books60 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 690 reviews
September 16, 2019
I should have listened to my Goodreads friend Jon, who told me that this book was not nearly as funny or entertaining as it promised to be.
It is difficult at times to tell if Assholes is a parody of dry, prolix, academic treatises, or just a treatise about assholes written in a dry, prolix, academic style. The final result is much the same. I won't deny there are a few worthwhile pages here--the definition of "asshole," for example, is a precise one that articulates the distinction between boor, asshole and psychopath--but there is lots and lots of padding here. I suspect it would have made an amusing magazine article, but there is just not enough here for a book.
The principal reason I kept reading this book was that I hoped it would turn out to be more like Harry G. Frankfurt's incisive and instructive "On Bullshit," which I read a few years ago and which was much shorter and more to the point. Do not make the same mistake I made: "Assholes" never rises to the level of "Bullshit."
December 23, 2018
Assholes, A theory was published by Aaron James, a Harvard educated philosopher and surfer, in 2012.
I have to admit that when I picked up the book, I was amused by the title and considered that it might be a one trick pony, sort of like a Saturday Night Live skit stretched out into a book, funny at the beginning and then petered out towards the end.
I was pleasantly surprised and more than amused, I was engrossed by the author’s well thought out and intelligent ideas.
First, James defines what it means to be an asshole. His working definition: In interpersonal or cooperative relations, the asshole allows himself to enjoy special advantages and does so systematically, does this out of an entrenched sense of entitlement, and is immunized by his sense of entitlement against the complaints of other people.
The author then goes on to describe various types of asshole, such as the royal asshole, the political asshole and the delusional asshole. In humorous, by not always unkind fashion, James also goes on to list some examples.
James also distinguishes between the common asshole and those who suffer, and by extension, cause others to suffer due to mental illness (psychopaths and narcissists) and your garden variety of jerks, schmucks, clowns and those who do not act out of a systematic character, but who simply, and temporarily, “act like an asshole”.
In contrast to the anti-social and maddening behavior of the asshole, James introduces us to the anti-asshole, the cooperative person. This person, comprising the great majority of social humans, is that person to whom standing patiently in a line, or volunteering for the common good, is juxtaposed and found at odds with the self-centered and insensitive misanthrope.
Finally, James helps us to cope with idea on asshole management and stoic acceptance.
The reviews on this book are mixed and I think I know why. Most readers, myself included, will read the title and assume that this will be a riotous laugh out loud calling out of social ne’er do wells. This is instead, a philosophic and astute essay on those people in polite society who drive the rest of us insane. Quoting Hobbes, Rousseau, Hegel, Gandhi, and Jesus, James gives us a scholarly approach to an age old and ever increasing problem.
** 2018 - The great thing about this book is that I still think about it often as I am out and about. And it has become a guide to dealing with these people that we find everywhere. Most interestingly, this book has helped me to not be as judgmental and universal in my occasional scorn. Rather than saying "that person is an asshole" I more frequently assign the term "acting like an asshole" for a presumed momentary lapse in civility. The most common display is of course "they're driving like an asshole".
I have to admit that when I picked up the book, I was amused by the title and considered that it might be a one trick pony, sort of like a Saturday Night Live skit stretched out into a book, funny at the beginning and then petered out towards the end.
I was pleasantly surprised and more than amused, I was engrossed by the author’s well thought out and intelligent ideas.
First, James defines what it means to be an asshole. His working definition: In interpersonal or cooperative relations, the asshole allows himself to enjoy special advantages and does so systematically, does this out of an entrenched sense of entitlement, and is immunized by his sense of entitlement against the complaints of other people.
The author then goes on to describe various types of asshole, such as the royal asshole, the political asshole and the delusional asshole. In humorous, by not always unkind fashion, James also goes on to list some examples.
James also distinguishes between the common asshole and those who suffer, and by extension, cause others to suffer due to mental illness (psychopaths and narcissists) and your garden variety of jerks, schmucks, clowns and those who do not act out of a systematic character, but who simply, and temporarily, “act like an asshole”.
In contrast to the anti-social and maddening behavior of the asshole, James introduces us to the anti-asshole, the cooperative person. This person, comprising the great majority of social humans, is that person to whom standing patiently in a line, or volunteering for the common good, is juxtaposed and found at odds with the self-centered and insensitive misanthrope.
Finally, James helps us to cope with idea on asshole management and stoic acceptance.
The reviews on this book are mixed and I think I know why. Most readers, myself included, will read the title and assume that this will be a riotous laugh out loud calling out of social ne’er do wells. This is instead, a philosophic and astute essay on those people in polite society who drive the rest of us insane. Quoting Hobbes, Rousseau, Hegel, Gandhi, and Jesus, James gives us a scholarly approach to an age old and ever increasing problem.
** 2018 - The great thing about this book is that I still think about it often as I am out and about. And it has become a guide to dealing with these people that we find everywhere. Most interestingly, this book has helped me to not be as judgmental and universal in my occasional scorn. Rather than saying "that person is an asshole" I more frequently assign the term "acting like an asshole" for a presumed momentary lapse in civility. The most common display is of course "they're driving like an asshole".
April 8, 2015
I must admit that this is another book that caught my eye simply due to the title. Be warned- it is what it appears to be- a book about assholes, so the title can be taken literally. If you are an asshole or have ever been called one- to your face or behind your back- you may or may not be ready for this book. For those who know an asshole or two, after reading this book, the list will grow. Either way, keep reading my review.
Up until reading this book, I don’t think I completely understood the sheer amount of differing types of assholes that I am subjected to and surrounded by on a daily basis. I applaud Aaron James for a well-researched book on the subject of assholes. The book does an impressive job of describing the ingredients of an asshole, the different asshole styles that one might encounter, and how we choose to respond to an asshole.
The sole subject of this read is about the asshole, “the person who (wrongly) believes himself—assholes are almost invariably male—to be worthy of special treatment due to an entrenched sense of entitlement”. By definition, the person who habitually speeds recklessly down the freeway, creating chaos and havoc, is an asshole. But psychopaths like Hitler and Stalin are not assholes - they meet some of the criteria, but they brought far too much suffering on others to be mere assholes. Broad description, right? Okay- I’ll go a step further. Wondering if you or someone who you know is an asshole?? Without giving away the book… think of the person who cuts lines, because their time is more valuable than others; or of the inconsiderate idiot who takes a call while in the movie theater, because that is more important than your enjoyment; or the douche who would fire staff to meet earnings-per-share requirements for their bonuses. Get the picture?
And just when you thought you knew everything about the asshole, my favorite chapter appeared- “Asshole Capitalism.” You have to read the book to know why!!
Outside of my personal enjoyment with reading the word asshole so many times in one book, I found this to be a pleasurable read. It will make me think logically about the kind of asshole I am listening to and/or dealing with, with the understanding that they will never change. The only thing that can change is how I choose to deal with them. Someone should, however, write a book on asshole management. Hint hint.
Up until reading this book, I don’t think I completely understood the sheer amount of differing types of assholes that I am subjected to and surrounded by on a daily basis. I applaud Aaron James for a well-researched book on the subject of assholes. The book does an impressive job of describing the ingredients of an asshole, the different asshole styles that one might encounter, and how we choose to respond to an asshole.
The sole subject of this read is about the asshole, “the person who (wrongly) believes himself—assholes are almost invariably male—to be worthy of special treatment due to an entrenched sense of entitlement”. By definition, the person who habitually speeds recklessly down the freeway, creating chaos and havoc, is an asshole. But psychopaths like Hitler and Stalin are not assholes - they meet some of the criteria, but they brought far too much suffering on others to be mere assholes. Broad description, right? Okay- I’ll go a step further. Wondering if you or someone who you know is an asshole?? Without giving away the book… think of the person who cuts lines, because their time is more valuable than others; or of the inconsiderate idiot who takes a call while in the movie theater, because that is more important than your enjoyment; or the douche who would fire staff to meet earnings-per-share requirements for their bonuses. Get the picture?
And just when you thought you knew everything about the asshole, my favorite chapter appeared- “Asshole Capitalism.” You have to read the book to know why!!
Outside of my personal enjoyment with reading the word asshole so many times in one book, I found this to be a pleasurable read. It will make me think logically about the kind of asshole I am listening to and/or dealing with, with the understanding that they will never change. The only thing that can change is how I choose to deal with them. Someone should, however, write a book on asshole management. Hint hint.
February 9, 2017
I'm glad I went into this with eyes wide opened as to the widespread prevalence and ubiquitous presence of assholes.
I mean, honestly, we all know one, or two, or sometimes a full office full of them. And even if we don't have many real life line-cutters, traffic-weavers, or conversation killers in our lives, at least we have Trump. And high-level bankers. And Rush. And practically the entire existing vocal portion of the political process in America. We have lots and lots and lots of good examples.
What didn't really have was a comprehensive attempt to define and refine all the aspects about what truly makes up an Asshole. Enter this book. The extremely nerdy logical equivalent of a loud fart. Not humorous in the way most of us like fart jokes, mind you. It's just so nerdy it still had me chuckling the entire time.
Assholes are people with entrenched senses of entitlement.
Pretty easy. They will sometimes give you long winded reasons why they do asshole things, giving lip service to the basic moral equivalency of cooperation and knowing that we're all in the same boat, but they still go ahead and pull an asshole move anyway. Assholes can be that person who always complains to the management when his McD fries aren't fresh enough. They're also the people who perpetuate the idea of the Noblese, making sure you know that you deserve so much more while taking the lion's share of everything. They are the people that we wish we could curtail with laws and restrictions and sanctions, but because the things they're doing are socially reprehensible, and not precisely unlawful, we all just look on in disgust as they get away with it.
Fun stuff.
I most appreciated the sociological ramifications and possible means to put assholes in their place. :)
Totally recommend, dude. Especially for surfers.
I mean, honestly, we all know one, or two, or sometimes a full office full of them. And even if we don't have many real life line-cutters, traffic-weavers, or conversation killers in our lives, at least we have Trump. And high-level bankers. And Rush. And practically the entire existing vocal portion of the political process in America. We have lots and lots and lots of good examples.
What didn't really have was a comprehensive attempt to define and refine all the aspects about what truly makes up an Asshole. Enter this book. The extremely nerdy logical equivalent of a loud fart. Not humorous in the way most of us like fart jokes, mind you. It's just so nerdy it still had me chuckling the entire time.
Assholes are people with entrenched senses of entitlement.
Pretty easy. They will sometimes give you long winded reasons why they do asshole things, giving lip service to the basic moral equivalency of cooperation and knowing that we're all in the same boat, but they still go ahead and pull an asshole move anyway. Assholes can be that person who always complains to the management when his McD fries aren't fresh enough. They're also the people who perpetuate the idea of the Noblese, making sure you know that you deserve so much more while taking the lion's share of everything. They are the people that we wish we could curtail with laws and restrictions and sanctions, but because the things they're doing are socially reprehensible, and not precisely unlawful, we all just look on in disgust as they get away with it.
Fun stuff.
I most appreciated the sociological ramifications and possible means to put assholes in their place. :)
Totally recommend, dude. Especially for surfers.
January 10, 2013
While the title might mislead prospective readers to assume that "Assholes: A Theory" offers either a lighthearted assortment of anti-asshole yet thoroughly assholish quips or an amoral guidebook in the manner of Machiavelli's "The Prince," what this book really delivers is a complete account of the psychology, morality, and social bearing of the common asshole.
James is a serious philosopher, and "Assholes" is a serious piece of ethics. James handles the asshole phenomenon from every angle. The "asshole," as he defines it, is someone who systematically allows himself special advantages in his relations with others out of an entrenched sense on entitlement that leaves him inoculated against the legitimate complaints of others. It is that very failure to acknowledge others as moral equals that makes them so frustrating to others. Yet even when we do fight back, assholes come equipped with a set of defenses that leave them invulnerable to capitulation. If assholes are left unchecked, or worse, if they are encouraged, by society, then it can create a host of interpersonal and societal problems, some of which may spiral into ever worse social outcomes.
As a philosopher, James is quite careful about every facet of his argument, drawing on such great ethicists as Plato, Kant, Rousseau, and Hobbes to deploy his message. The asshole may in fact be a given and inescapable part of life, yet to the extent that we can, we should strive to support a society that discourages assholes and encourages cooperation.
James is a serious philosopher, and "Assholes" is a serious piece of ethics. James handles the asshole phenomenon from every angle. The "asshole," as he defines it, is someone who systematically allows himself special advantages in his relations with others out of an entrenched sense on entitlement that leaves him inoculated against the legitimate complaints of others. It is that very failure to acknowledge others as moral equals that makes them so frustrating to others. Yet even when we do fight back, assholes come equipped with a set of defenses that leave them invulnerable to capitulation. If assholes are left unchecked, or worse, if they are encouraged, by society, then it can create a host of interpersonal and societal problems, some of which may spiral into ever worse social outcomes.
As a philosopher, James is quite careful about every facet of his argument, drawing on such great ethicists as Plato, Kant, Rousseau, and Hobbes to deploy his message. The asshole may in fact be a given and inescapable part of life, yet to the extent that we can, we should strive to support a society that discourages assholes and encourages cooperation.
April 11, 2021
Har-har-har, so very fragging funny. I think it needs another chapter: on how to self-ID assholism.
September 20, 2025
“If justice goes, there is no longer any value in human beings’ living on the earth.”---Immanuel Kant
Assholes are everywhere. We work with them. We shop with them. We drive on the same roads with them. We have them in our own family. We even have one currently as our President of the United States. Assholes are a fact of life. They have always been with us, and they always will. But that doesn’t mean we have to turn the other cheek, back down, curl up, and take their shit.
University of California, Irvine philosophy professor, avid surfer, and non-asshole Aaron James’s book “Assholes: A Theory”, while couched in humor, describes a very serious societal problem: the proliferation of assholes.
Everyone could probably tell you who an asshole is, even if they couldn’t adequately define the term. It’s a distinction that we can all intuitively make: distinguishing between generally good people who occasionally do asshole-ish things from those who are consistently assholes for their entire lives.
Generally, the difference lies in how the person deals with their own asshole-ish behavior. The good person will usually feel guilt and shame regarding his or her behavior and eventually apologize for it. The asshole doesn’t even know or care that his or her behavior was wrong or hurtful, and even if they did, they certainly aren’t going to apologize for it.
As James explains, there is a strong sense of entitlement that an asshole has regarding his or her behavior. It is this trait that is the predominantly defining trait of the asshole: “The asshole... is wholly immunized against the complaints of others. Whether or not the complaint is ultimately reasonable, the person is not registered, from the asshole’s point of view, as worthy of consideration. The person who complains is not seen as a potential source of reasonable complaint but is simply walled out. If the person complaining is “standing up for herself”, in order to be recognized, it is as though she were physically present but morally nonexistent in the asshole’s view of the world. (p. 27)”
James emphasizes that assholes aren’t sociopaths. The distinction is important: sociopaths have no sense of right or wrong, nor do they have the ability to empathize with others. Assholes, on the other hand, know what is right and wrong but they often don’t give a shit. They also have the ability to empathize with others, but they more often than not view themselves as morally superior to everyone else, so if, by chance, their behavior inadvertently insults or injures someone, the asshole’s view is “tough shit”.
This is not to say that sociopaths can’t also be assholes. It’s just not necessarily a given. Even Ted Bundy, by all accounts, was considered a gentleman, when he wasn’t making lampshades out of the flesh of his neighbors.
So what can we do about assholes? Not much, really, since being an asshole isn’t a crime. James, however, suggests that simply calling out an asshole on their asshole-ish behavior can often be enough for self-satisfaction.
Take, for example, the asshole on the highway: the guy who cuts us off or refuses to let us pass or simply zips through traffic at reckless and dangerous speeds.
I have been known to scream obscenities at this asshole, knowing full well that he or she can’t hear me through closed car windows and several dozen feet of distance. I know, intellectually, it’s futile and pointless, but it still makes me feel a little better. Why is that?
James offers the explanation that hearing ourselves call someone out as an asshole can be cathartic: “When the asshole has failed to give us our due in traffic, we swear out loud, not to get him to listen but to reassure ourselves that others, real or imagined, would hear our case and agree. We in effect tell ourselves that if he won’t uphold our status as a moral equal, everyone else will. (p.127)”
Calling out assholes is an attempt at standing up and speaking out against oppression. The point of calling someone an “asshole” in a public setting is, according to James, “much like the point of nonviolent protest (p. 128)”.
Arguably, assholes can’t hurt you, other than perhaps one’s pride. The asshole who mutters racist or sexist epithets toward you or continues talking during the movie after you’ve politely told them to be quiet is probably too much of a coward to actually do anything about it if you did call them out on it. This is a huge part of what makes him or her an asshole.
The ancient Greek Stoic philosopher Epictetus once said, “People don’t have the power to hurt you. Even if someone shouts abuse at you or strikes you, if you are insulted, it is always your choice to view what is happening as insulting or not. If someone irritates you, it is only your own response that is irritating you. Therefore, when anyone seems to be provoking you, remember that it is only your judgment of the incident that provokes you. (p.131)”
This makes sense up to a point, but the disturbing truth is that, sometimes, assholes do have the power to hurt you. It may not be in a direct way. It may be subtle. It may be the Koch Bros. and their behind-the-scenes campaign to stop federally mandated safety regulations for their various industries that are there to protect people. It may be Donald Trump and his plan for undoing the policies to mitigate effects of global climate change. They may not be holding a gun to you and pulling the trigger, but their actions motivated by greed could have an indirect deadly effect on innocent people.
The only way to truly combat dangerous assholes is to support and maintain what James calls “asshole-dampening systems”. These are “social institutions, such as the family, religion, public education, or the rule of law---that keeps the asshole population from getting out of hand. For if the proportion of assholes in the population becomes too large (i.e., the non-asshole to asshole ratio takes a dive), cooperative people will become increasingly unable or unwilling or just too few in number to uphold the practices and institutions needed for a society to stave off decline. (p. 144)”
Sadly and terrifyingly, this may be happening now. As Trump becomes the Asshole President of the United States, along with his basket of deplorable assholes he has picked to be Cabinet members, we may gradually see an uptick of assholes. Certainly, asshole behavior is on the rise, as evident in a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center that shows a marked increase in hate crimes just within the first week after the November election. (https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2...)
Is it that hard to believe that generally good people who have felt disenfranchised or scared to death by a fear-mongering media may feel that Trump’s pussy-grabbing, bullying, politically incorrect, fascist rhetoric and behavior over the past year is a green light to let loose on all the angry, knee-jerk, pent-up frustrations they have kept buried for years?
Assholes are everywhere, but that doesn’t mean everyone is an asshole. I have to have faith that there are more non-assholes than assholes out there, ready to stand up and fight (hopefully not literally) against bigotry, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism, anti-Islam, anti-pacifism, anti-intellectualism.
I have to believe that there are more people willing to stand up for things like freedom, peace, accountability, education.
Because, frankly, if you don’t stand up for stuff like that, then you’re an asshole.
Assholes are everywhere. We work with them. We shop with them. We drive on the same roads with them. We have them in our own family. We even have one currently as our President of the United States. Assholes are a fact of life. They have always been with us, and they always will. But that doesn’t mean we have to turn the other cheek, back down, curl up, and take their shit.
University of California, Irvine philosophy professor, avid surfer, and non-asshole Aaron James’s book “Assholes: A Theory”, while couched in humor, describes a very serious societal problem: the proliferation of assholes.
Everyone could probably tell you who an asshole is, even if they couldn’t adequately define the term. It’s a distinction that we can all intuitively make: distinguishing between generally good people who occasionally do asshole-ish things from those who are consistently assholes for their entire lives.
Generally, the difference lies in how the person deals with their own asshole-ish behavior. The good person will usually feel guilt and shame regarding his or her behavior and eventually apologize for it. The asshole doesn’t even know or care that his or her behavior was wrong or hurtful, and even if they did, they certainly aren’t going to apologize for it.
As James explains, there is a strong sense of entitlement that an asshole has regarding his or her behavior. It is this trait that is the predominantly defining trait of the asshole: “The asshole... is wholly immunized against the complaints of others. Whether or not the complaint is ultimately reasonable, the person is not registered, from the asshole’s point of view, as worthy of consideration. The person who complains is not seen as a potential source of reasonable complaint but is simply walled out. If the person complaining is “standing up for herself”, in order to be recognized, it is as though she were physically present but morally nonexistent in the asshole’s view of the world. (p. 27)”
James emphasizes that assholes aren’t sociopaths. The distinction is important: sociopaths have no sense of right or wrong, nor do they have the ability to empathize with others. Assholes, on the other hand, know what is right and wrong but they often don’t give a shit. They also have the ability to empathize with others, but they more often than not view themselves as morally superior to everyone else, so if, by chance, their behavior inadvertently insults or injures someone, the asshole’s view is “tough shit”.
This is not to say that sociopaths can’t also be assholes. It’s just not necessarily a given. Even Ted Bundy, by all accounts, was considered a gentleman, when he wasn’t making lampshades out of the flesh of his neighbors.
So what can we do about assholes? Not much, really, since being an asshole isn’t a crime. James, however, suggests that simply calling out an asshole on their asshole-ish behavior can often be enough for self-satisfaction.
Take, for example, the asshole on the highway: the guy who cuts us off or refuses to let us pass or simply zips through traffic at reckless and dangerous speeds.
I have been known to scream obscenities at this asshole, knowing full well that he or she can’t hear me through closed car windows and several dozen feet of distance. I know, intellectually, it’s futile and pointless, but it still makes me feel a little better. Why is that?
James offers the explanation that hearing ourselves call someone out as an asshole can be cathartic: “When the asshole has failed to give us our due in traffic, we swear out loud, not to get him to listen but to reassure ourselves that others, real or imagined, would hear our case and agree. We in effect tell ourselves that if he won’t uphold our status as a moral equal, everyone else will. (p.127)”
Calling out assholes is an attempt at standing up and speaking out against oppression. The point of calling someone an “asshole” in a public setting is, according to James, “much like the point of nonviolent protest (p. 128)”.
Arguably, assholes can’t hurt you, other than perhaps one’s pride. The asshole who mutters racist or sexist epithets toward you or continues talking during the movie after you’ve politely told them to be quiet is probably too much of a coward to actually do anything about it if you did call them out on it. This is a huge part of what makes him or her an asshole.
The ancient Greek Stoic philosopher Epictetus once said, “People don’t have the power to hurt you. Even if someone shouts abuse at you or strikes you, if you are insulted, it is always your choice to view what is happening as insulting or not. If someone irritates you, it is only your own response that is irritating you. Therefore, when anyone seems to be provoking you, remember that it is only your judgment of the incident that provokes you. (p.131)”
This makes sense up to a point, but the disturbing truth is that, sometimes, assholes do have the power to hurt you. It may not be in a direct way. It may be subtle. It may be the Koch Bros. and their behind-the-scenes campaign to stop federally mandated safety regulations for their various industries that are there to protect people. It may be Donald Trump and his plan for undoing the policies to mitigate effects of global climate change. They may not be holding a gun to you and pulling the trigger, but their actions motivated by greed could have an indirect deadly effect on innocent people.
The only way to truly combat dangerous assholes is to support and maintain what James calls “asshole-dampening systems”. These are “social institutions, such as the family, religion, public education, or the rule of law---that keeps the asshole population from getting out of hand. For if the proportion of assholes in the population becomes too large (i.e., the non-asshole to asshole ratio takes a dive), cooperative people will become increasingly unable or unwilling or just too few in number to uphold the practices and institutions needed for a society to stave off decline. (p. 144)”
Sadly and terrifyingly, this may be happening now. As Trump becomes the Asshole President of the United States, along with his basket of deplorable assholes he has picked to be Cabinet members, we may gradually see an uptick of assholes. Certainly, asshole behavior is on the rise, as evident in a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center that shows a marked increase in hate crimes just within the first week after the November election. (https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2...)
Is it that hard to believe that generally good people who have felt disenfranchised or scared to death by a fear-mongering media may feel that Trump’s pussy-grabbing, bullying, politically incorrect, fascist rhetoric and behavior over the past year is a green light to let loose on all the angry, knee-jerk, pent-up frustrations they have kept buried for years?
Assholes are everywhere, but that doesn’t mean everyone is an asshole. I have to have faith that there are more non-assholes than assholes out there, ready to stand up and fight (hopefully not literally) against bigotry, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism, anti-Islam, anti-pacifism, anti-intellectualism.
I have to believe that there are more people willing to stand up for things like freedom, peace, accountability, education.
Because, frankly, if you don’t stand up for stuff like that, then you’re an asshole.
Want to read
July 26, 2016I've decided to re-shelve this, I know it is me, not the author; but for reasons I do not understand, I just can't seem to focus on this book. I'm going to pick it up again in the fall, when my own mind is a bit quieter.
7/26/16
******** ******** ************* ************* ***********
I saw this book opened up in front of someone and I couldn't resist asking about it---the title demands it---turns out a mom and her teen-aged daughter were both reading the book, passing it back and forth and both of them had only good things to say so of course I had to buy my own copy.
Just the first chapter in, but no buyer's remorse here!
7/11/16
7/26/16
******** ******** ************* ************* ***********
I saw this book opened up in front of someone and I couldn't resist asking about it---the title demands it---turns out a mom and her teen-aged daughter were both reading the book, passing it back and forth and both of them had only good things to say so of course I had to buy my own copy.
Just the first chapter in, but no buyer's remorse here!
7/11/16
February 7, 2013
Whew! I am so glad I finally finished this book.
With the title it has, and with its small size and large print, this book should have taken me a couple hours. But, because it was so boring, it took me four days instead!
I was looking for funny and useful suggestions for dealing with assholes, and instead I got a boring academic discussion on the various aspects of assholery. Chapters on "asshole management", which should have been fun to read, were dull and tedious. At times this guy's assessment of public figures who were also assholes seemed to be, shall we say, slightly influenced by politics. The worst part of it was that he brought philosophers into the discussion of assholes! No thank you!
I could not bring myself to one-star this book, because the author, who has Ivy League affiliations, can certainly write well enough. He just needs another PhD in being interesting, in my opinion.
With the title it has, and with its small size and large print, this book should have taken me a couple hours. But, because it was so boring, it took me four days instead!
I was looking for funny and useful suggestions for dealing with assholes, and instead I got a boring academic discussion on the various aspects of assholery. Chapters on "asshole management", which should have been fun to read, were dull and tedious. At times this guy's assessment of public figures who were also assholes seemed to be, shall we say, slightly influenced by politics. The worst part of it was that he brought philosophers into the discussion of assholes! No thank you!
I could not bring myself to one-star this book, because the author, who has Ivy League affiliations, can certainly write well enough. He just needs another PhD in being interesting, in my opinion.
June 16, 2013
Should I be concerned that one of my favorite staff members at my local library grabbed me and said, "Judy, we just got in a book that I think you should read."? Fingers crossed that she wasn't making a value judgment or statement. I think that she thought I would be interested. And I was. Aaron James received his PhD from Harvard and is a professor of philosophy at the University of California--Irvine and he takes a philosophical approach in dealing with the subject of assholes. James points out that assholes can be found anywhere--in history, in public life, in entertainment, in our workplaces, in our religious groups, in our circle of friends and acquaintances, in those we randomly meet on a daily basis, and, unfortunately, sometimes in our families. James feels that an asshole is not just a deeply bothersome person, but is a person who is bothersome enough to trigger strong feelings of powerlessness, fear, or rage in others. While there are many people that I have been known to mutter, "asshole" when out of their hearing, James cautions that a true asshole demonstrates three characteristics. 1. He allows himself to feel entitled to enjoy certain advantages in daily life on a regular basis, 2. He does this out of a strong and deeply held sense of entitlement, and 3. He is unable to understand why other people complain about his attitudes and behavior. The asshole believes that he is special and the rules of conduct that govern others do not apply to him. Oh yes, I know these people. James uses the pronoun "he" in talking about assholes because, while he recognizes that women can indeed be assholes, he feels that the vast majority of assholes are men and concludes that this is culturally based. In arguing that assholes are made and not born, James feels that culture is such a strong indicator that "a newborn baby boy in the United States, Italy, or Israel is much more likely to live the life of an asshole than a newborn baby boy in Japan or Norway or Canada." James cautions that everyone, no doubt, acts like an asshole in certain situations or over a short period of time (a day, a couple of days, a week) because of the stresses of daily life, but, that doesn't mean the person is. To be an asshole is to exhibit such behavior consistently over a long period of time, and James feels that "if you are willing to call yourself an asshole, this indicates that you are not in fact one." James points out that assholes are not particularly difficult to spot--however, he does argue that public figures are often misrepresented in the media, so readers need to be cautious about labels. And then, to my delight, he went on to name names. Who is on the list? Rush Limbaugh, Michael Moore, H.L. Mencken, Ann Coulter (yikes, a female, kudos Ann), Richard Dawkins, General George Patton, John Edwards, Ralph Nader, Rahm Emanuel, Douglas MacArthur, Julian Assange, Donald Trump, Dick Chaney, and a host of others. In dealing with the aggressive behavior of assholes, James warns readers to pick your battles, selectively resist when the issue is important to you, and don't expect the behavior of the asshole to change. Good advice. I would have given this book 4 stars, but the chapter on "asshole capitalism" dragged on and on to the point that I began to suspect that he was summarizing a graduate school paper or perhaps a portion of his dissertation. Or, maybe I'm just being an asshole.
January 9, 2013
This was very much a book by a writer who's fairly sure he's funny. It's actually pretty dry.
The opening chapters, developing a taxonomy of assholes, are occasionally amusing. I blew air out of my nose slightly harder than normal a few times, I think I smirked once or twice. His general conception of the asshole is one who, against all logic and reason, considers themselves entitled to more than everyone else. Let me cut in; let me have that parking space; let me have control over the board; don't you know who I am?
Prof. James then considers the impact that assholes can have on individuals, on groups, and (if a certain critical mass is achieved) on nation-states. In general, he states, without sufficient resistance from non-assholes (in which we include the allied species of jerks and schmucks, who - unlike the asshole - don't consider themselves entitled to more than they deserve, and thus are likely to get their backs up when they see someone else horning in on their stuff), the assholes take over and that's why we can't have nice things.
(His proof for this comes in a roundabout way from game theory; at some point, the cost of contribution to a shared outcome results in a net loss if too many are withdrawing but not contributing. His algebra's not great, but the point is valid.)
He then examines the impact that conglomerations of assholes can have on capitalism and market economies. If the assholes are obsessed with taking more than their share, and are given positive reinforcement for their assholism (e.g. bankers following the GFC claiming that they deserved their multimillion dollar bonuses because clearly, they deserve it, because they're so very smart, you can tell they're so smart and deserve their bonuses because otherwise they wouldn't be getting their bonuses) then the market economy is no longer achieving its raison d'etre - that is, to use the collective savings of a nation to improve the quality of life for all via un- or semi-directed investment. If all the money's going to nonproductive 'industries' (and I use the term loosely) then the rest of us are left with two thirds of fuck-all, courtesy of the assholes.
OK, that became a bit of a diatribe. Overall, the book is ok; his points are valid and his arguments are well-reasoned. The author's not a sparkling wit, so it can be a bit dry at times.
The opening chapters, developing a taxonomy of assholes, are occasionally amusing. I blew air out of my nose slightly harder than normal a few times, I think I smirked once or twice. His general conception of the asshole is one who, against all logic and reason, considers themselves entitled to more than everyone else. Let me cut in; let me have that parking space; let me have control over the board; don't you know who I am?
Prof. James then considers the impact that assholes can have on individuals, on groups, and (if a certain critical mass is achieved) on nation-states. In general, he states, without sufficient resistance from non-assholes (in which we include the allied species of jerks and schmucks, who - unlike the asshole - don't consider themselves entitled to more than they deserve, and thus are likely to get their backs up when they see someone else horning in on their stuff), the assholes take over and that's why we can't have nice things.
(His proof for this comes in a roundabout way from game theory; at some point, the cost of contribution to a shared outcome results in a net loss if too many are withdrawing but not contributing. His algebra's not great, but the point is valid.)
He then examines the impact that conglomerations of assholes can have on capitalism and market economies. If the assholes are obsessed with taking more than their share, and are given positive reinforcement for their assholism (e.g. bankers following the GFC claiming that they deserved their multimillion dollar bonuses because clearly, they deserve it, because they're so very smart, you can tell they're so smart and deserve their bonuses because otherwise they wouldn't be getting their bonuses) then the market economy is no longer achieving its raison d'etre - that is, to use the collective savings of a nation to improve the quality of life for all via un- or semi-directed investment. If all the money's going to nonproductive 'industries' (and I use the term loosely) then the rest of us are left with two thirds of fuck-all, courtesy of the assholes.
OK, that became a bit of a diatribe. Overall, the book is ok; his points are valid and his arguments are well-reasoned. The author's not a sparkling wit, so it can be a bit dry at times.
June 15, 2012
2.5 stars.
The description of this book is a bit misleading. I was expecting a lighter yet informative read. There were some moments where I enjoyed it and chuckled quite a bit, but I wish there was more material to relate to for myself.
I liked the descriptions of the types of assholes. While reading it, I found myself thinking of all of the ones in my life, appropriately categorizing them along the way.
The book would break off into a lot of lengthy political tangents, which I didn't really care about. I know politicians are assholes. I don't need a rehash of the history about it. I don't care to categorize what kind of assholes *they* are. I just care about the ones in my everyday life...and celebs.
I wanted more definitive guidance as to what would be the best course of action to deal with them. What's written is common sense; or at least it suggests for you to use it.
I also wasn't a fan of the nature vs. nurture argument and how culture cultivates assholes. There were too many sweeping generalizations, suggesting that Canada and Japan don't have assholes in comparison to the US and Italy (which I personally think is total B.S. because I've spent time in both Japan and Canada and can affirm that they have assholes, especially beneath the surface).
There were a few wise words that were highlight-worthy, but they were more about how I should internalize assholian attitudes as opposed to the best recourse to fight back. I found myself willing to instead just copy and print the "letter to an asshole" at the end of the book because it expressed my feelings fairly accurately.
So while I had a couple of issues with this book, it's worth a look, especially for the asshole categorizations, the "letter to an asshole" at the end, and the game theory, which made me reminisce about my college days where we experimented with this theory for a class project in business school.
The description of this book is a bit misleading. I was expecting a lighter yet informative read. There were some moments where I enjoyed it and chuckled quite a bit, but I wish there was more material to relate to for myself.
I liked the descriptions of the types of assholes. While reading it, I found myself thinking of all of the ones in my life, appropriately categorizing them along the way.
The book would break off into a lot of lengthy political tangents, which I didn't really care about. I know politicians are assholes. I don't need a rehash of the history about it. I don't care to categorize what kind of assholes *they* are. I just care about the ones in my everyday life...and celebs.
I wanted more definitive guidance as to what would be the best course of action to deal with them. What's written is common sense; or at least it suggests for you to use it.
I also wasn't a fan of the nature vs. nurture argument and how culture cultivates assholes. There were too many sweeping generalizations, suggesting that Canada and Japan don't have assholes in comparison to the US and Italy (which I personally think is total B.S. because I've spent time in both Japan and Canada and can affirm that they have assholes, especially beneath the surface).
There were a few wise words that were highlight-worthy, but they were more about how I should internalize assholian attitudes as opposed to the best recourse to fight back. I found myself willing to instead just copy and print the "letter to an asshole" at the end of the book because it expressed my feelings fairly accurately.
So while I had a couple of issues with this book, it's worth a look, especially for the asshole categorizations, the "letter to an asshole" at the end, and the game theory, which made me reminisce about my college days where we experimented with this theory for a class project in business school.
May 16, 2019
Am thinking that this might’ve made a really snappy essay. Author notes Harry Frankfurt’s text On Bullshit and identifies his own argument as lying “within this distinguished line of research” (9), which demonstrates a reasonable sense of humor.
The basic definition of the term is a person who “allows himself to enjoy special advantages and does so systematically,” “out of an entrenched sense of entitlement,” and “is immunized by his sense of entitlement against the complaints of other people” (5), which strikes me as a deontological rationale. This character is marked out by a profound illiberalism, as “the asshole refuses to listen to our legitimate complaints and so he poses a challenge to the idea that we are each to be recognized as moral equals” (4).
This character is furthermore placed on a continuum insofar as “we are quite justified in removing a murderer or a rapist or a tyrant from society by force,” as “the material costs such people impose upon others are enormous and often beyond repair”; however the cost of assholes, “a longer wait in line, a snide remark, a ruined afternoon—are often by comparison moderate” (11). Here, if we follow this utilitarian rationale, we need to quantify the aggregate effects of all the unremoved assholes out there to determine if the cumulative incremental externalities that they impose are worse than the impositions of the removable villains aforesaid. (I wager that the everyday assholes weigh much more heavily; can we commence shooting jaywalkers and parking violators and cinema cellphone users now?)
Just to round out the traditional ethical approaches, we then see that “we are looking for a stable trait of character, or type of person—a vice rather than a particular act” (8)—that is, this line of inquiry relies upon an aretaic ethics.
Aptly sums up our dear friend Ayn Rand with “As his prominence declines, instead of becoming increasingly uncertain about his claim to attention, he becomes increasingly concerned about the deteriorating state of his profession” (17), which is the normal objectivist Dunning-Krugery manner of assessing anything that they don’t understand.
Several chapters constitute a theophrastian typology, a “teeming asshole ecosystem” (33), to wit: the boor is “willfully insensitive to normal boundaries of courtesy or respect” (37); the smug person is “comfortable in his sense that others are inferior and indeed presumes that others should well expect him to behave as their better” (39); the boss is Lumbergh in Office Space (43); and so on. It gets political quickly: Henry VIII, Bush the Younger; Rockefeller; et al. Steve Jobs is a ‘corporate asshole,’ believing that he can use parking spots reserved for disabled drivers (53). He tries to include figures from the left, such as Nader as a “self-aggrandizer” in the 2000 election (59), endorsing thereby the philistine thesis that Nader cost Gore the presidency. Pre-presidency Trump comes in as a self-aggrandizer (67). There's a special type in “cable news asshole,” which is apparently inclusive of misanthropic rightwingers such as O’Reilly as well as pissed off progressives such as Olbermann. (Colbert is a “faux blowhard” (68).) Picasso and Hemingway are held out as assholes, too (77).
The section on bankers (78-87) indicates the somewhat ephemeral concern here, as this was written soon after the 2008 financial crisis. The entire section of typology reads less like a rigorous philosophical examination of the concept (except as a wittgensteinian exemplification of the language involved, perhaps (see 37), eschewing very specifically platonist essential definition (see 29)) and more like a topical reflection on current events in mass culture. Nothing wrong with that, but that brings these sections in as some sort of cultural commentary.
There’s also a lengthy section on ‘Asshole Capitalism’ (144 ff.), which argues that “the proliferation of assholes suggests that Marx was wrong: capitalism is unstable but can give way to something worse” (148), with asshole capitalism marking out an “irreversible decline.” This means that Hobbes trumps Marx, apparently. For the record, Marx is not necessarily wrong on this point, having noted that the outcome of class struggle is either socialism or barbarism—the “mutual ruin of the contending classes” from the Manifesto, which is an important clause that socialists often mumble over in the prediction of future awesomeness. (Despite this, author ultimately endorses Rousseau over Hobbes.) There is a sense that capitalism is assholish because of the imperatives of liberal market participation, so there's that.
Much overlap with DSM-V diagnoses, such as personality disorders and psychopathy—not sure if that is at all useful, in terms of management of mental disease and disorder. These should not be terms of opprobrium, I don’t think. On the other hand, it may well be that assholism is some sort of mental disorder requiring sympathy?
One section is self-help (119 ff.), regarding how to manage encounters with persons described, supra. Much of this is pedestrian, though there is a durkheimian note that there is a positive role for social deviancy, helping to “rally the cooperative troops” (139)—the hypothesis is that walking zones of anomie assist normal persons in coalescing around acceptable behavior when the limits are imprecise—the assholes are accordingly not total deviants, but rather “deviants in the gray.”
Anyway, I’d leave off with the conclusion that these persons are lumpenized antisocial nihilists; we should subject them therefore to rehabilitation, and, were that to fail, enforce the writ de haeretico comburendo.
The basic definition of the term is a person who “allows himself to enjoy special advantages and does so systematically,” “out of an entrenched sense of entitlement,” and “is immunized by his sense of entitlement against the complaints of other people” (5), which strikes me as a deontological rationale. This character is marked out by a profound illiberalism, as “the asshole refuses to listen to our legitimate complaints and so he poses a challenge to the idea that we are each to be recognized as moral equals” (4).
This character is furthermore placed on a continuum insofar as “we are quite justified in removing a murderer or a rapist or a tyrant from society by force,” as “the material costs such people impose upon others are enormous and often beyond repair”; however the cost of assholes, “a longer wait in line, a snide remark, a ruined afternoon—are often by comparison moderate” (11). Here, if we follow this utilitarian rationale, we need to quantify the aggregate effects of all the unremoved assholes out there to determine if the cumulative incremental externalities that they impose are worse than the impositions of the removable villains aforesaid. (I wager that the everyday assholes weigh much more heavily; can we commence shooting jaywalkers and parking violators and cinema cellphone users now?)
Just to round out the traditional ethical approaches, we then see that “we are looking for a stable trait of character, or type of person—a vice rather than a particular act” (8)—that is, this line of inquiry relies upon an aretaic ethics.
Aptly sums up our dear friend Ayn Rand with “As his prominence declines, instead of becoming increasingly uncertain about his claim to attention, he becomes increasingly concerned about the deteriorating state of his profession” (17), which is the normal objectivist Dunning-Krugery manner of assessing anything that they don’t understand.
Several chapters constitute a theophrastian typology, a “teeming asshole ecosystem” (33), to wit: the boor is “willfully insensitive to normal boundaries of courtesy or respect” (37); the smug person is “comfortable in his sense that others are inferior and indeed presumes that others should well expect him to behave as their better” (39); the boss is Lumbergh in Office Space (43); and so on. It gets political quickly: Henry VIII, Bush the Younger; Rockefeller; et al. Steve Jobs is a ‘corporate asshole,’ believing that he can use parking spots reserved for disabled drivers (53). He tries to include figures from the left, such as Nader as a “self-aggrandizer” in the 2000 election (59), endorsing thereby the philistine thesis that Nader cost Gore the presidency. Pre-presidency Trump comes in as a self-aggrandizer (67). There's a special type in “cable news asshole,” which is apparently inclusive of misanthropic rightwingers such as O’Reilly as well as pissed off progressives such as Olbermann. (Colbert is a “faux blowhard” (68).) Picasso and Hemingway are held out as assholes, too (77).
The section on bankers (78-87) indicates the somewhat ephemeral concern here, as this was written soon after the 2008 financial crisis. The entire section of typology reads less like a rigorous philosophical examination of the concept (except as a wittgensteinian exemplification of the language involved, perhaps (see 37), eschewing very specifically platonist essential definition (see 29)) and more like a topical reflection on current events in mass culture. Nothing wrong with that, but that brings these sections in as some sort of cultural commentary.
There’s also a lengthy section on ‘Asshole Capitalism’ (144 ff.), which argues that “the proliferation of assholes suggests that Marx was wrong: capitalism is unstable but can give way to something worse” (148), with asshole capitalism marking out an “irreversible decline.” This means that Hobbes trumps Marx, apparently. For the record, Marx is not necessarily wrong on this point, having noted that the outcome of class struggle is either socialism or barbarism—the “mutual ruin of the contending classes” from the Manifesto, which is an important clause that socialists often mumble over in the prediction of future awesomeness. (Despite this, author ultimately endorses Rousseau over Hobbes.) There is a sense that capitalism is assholish because of the imperatives of liberal market participation, so there's that.
Much overlap with DSM-V diagnoses, such as personality disorders and psychopathy—not sure if that is at all useful, in terms of management of mental disease and disorder. These should not be terms of opprobrium, I don’t think. On the other hand, it may well be that assholism is some sort of mental disorder requiring sympathy?
One section is self-help (119 ff.), regarding how to manage encounters with persons described, supra. Much of this is pedestrian, though there is a durkheimian note that there is a positive role for social deviancy, helping to “rally the cooperative troops” (139)—the hypothesis is that walking zones of anomie assist normal persons in coalescing around acceptable behavior when the limits are imprecise—the assholes are accordingly not total deviants, but rather “deviants in the gray.”
Anyway, I’d leave off with the conclusion that these persons are lumpenized antisocial nihilists; we should subject them therefore to rehabilitation, and, were that to fail, enforce the writ de haeretico comburendo.
March 11, 2022
Interesting pop philosophy book on the concept of what makes an asshole an asshole. Although the author tries to make this accessible to everyone, it is a lot drier than the title makes it sound. As a philosophy major, I was fine with this, but I understand the reviewers who says this is "too boring" or "too technical". I also thought the structure could have been done better. But the idea is nice and I agree with most of the points and think it's a nice concept.
July 28, 2013
I found this book helpful in my continuing effort to understand why my place of employment is so rife with a-holes. But, as several other reviewers point out, there are a couple of problems with the book. First, James feels the need to do the philosopher thing (no surprise--he's a philosopher), that is, he focuses on logical nuances and possible counter-arguments and counter-explanations, which can get tedious at times. Also, as James notes, the book is not a practical advice book about how to deal with a-holes. He does have a part that he calls "managing a-holes," but it feels as though he added that part just to please his editor and allow for marketing to the more general reader.
All that said, James gives a useful and clarifying definition of what an a-hole is--someone who "(1) allows himself to enjoy special advantages and does so systematically; (2) does this out of an entrenched sense of entitlement; and (3) is immunized by his sense of entitlement against the complaints of other people." He also distinguishes the usually male a-hole from the usually female b*tch, who he notes may pretend to recognize other's equal status as humans to their faces, but then goes ahead and seeks privileges behind others' backs. I hadn't really thought much about what makes someone an a-hole--you know, you just recognize them. So this helped me to understand my reactions and the way assholery works.
I was also enlightened by James' discussion of how a culture can either limit or expand a-hole qualities among its people, and how the phenomenon can spread even to people who might not be prone to it. This explained a lot to me about why the institution for which I work is so universally unhelpful and nasty a place. (Not, of course, that there aren't good people, too, just fewer than would be expected). I had certainly characterized my workplace before, but this helped me be more precise in understanding how it got that way and how it continues to encourage asshole behavior on a daily basis, partly by not providing any correctives at all and in fact often rewarding those who do least for the common good and who assert their own superiority rampantly (whether it's justified or not).
So, there were parts of this book I loved and overall I found it a worthwhile read. Most of us, of course, wish there were better ways to counter assholes. James offers a few thoughts, but mostly notes that it's an art to "manage a-holes" and there are no real answers. I have to respect him for his honesty and for his call to awareness of how different values in our society can create more and more assholes. But, like so many of us, I want more HELP!
All that said, James gives a useful and clarifying definition of what an a-hole is--someone who "(1) allows himself to enjoy special advantages and does so systematically; (2) does this out of an entrenched sense of entitlement; and (3) is immunized by his sense of entitlement against the complaints of other people." He also distinguishes the usually male a-hole from the usually female b*tch, who he notes may pretend to recognize other's equal status as humans to their faces, but then goes ahead and seeks privileges behind others' backs. I hadn't really thought much about what makes someone an a-hole--you know, you just recognize them. So this helped me to understand my reactions and the way assholery works.
I was also enlightened by James' discussion of how a culture can either limit or expand a-hole qualities among its people, and how the phenomenon can spread even to people who might not be prone to it. This explained a lot to me about why the institution for which I work is so universally unhelpful and nasty a place. (Not, of course, that there aren't good people, too, just fewer than would be expected). I had certainly characterized my workplace before, but this helped me be more precise in understanding how it got that way and how it continues to encourage asshole behavior on a daily basis, partly by not providing any correctives at all and in fact often rewarding those who do least for the common good and who assert their own superiority rampantly (whether it's justified or not).
So, there were parts of this book I loved and overall I found it a worthwhile read. Most of us, of course, wish there were better ways to counter assholes. James offers a few thoughts, but mostly notes that it's an art to "manage a-holes" and there are no real answers. I have to respect him for his honesty and for his call to awareness of how different values in our society can create more and more assholes. But, like so many of us, I want more HELP!
March 30, 2013
I wanted to like this book, since I certainly agree with it; and my wife read it ahead of me, laughing long and often. I found it a good deal less funny, but I appreciated what I thought was a pretense of serious philosophical discussion ironically applied to a relatively trivial subject. But it turned out not to be a pretense, nor was it ironic. It was a careful (far too careful for me) analysis of exactly what an asshole is, how he (almost always a he) came to be what he is, what he does to society, particularly if there are too many of him, and what to do about it. But the writing is repetitive and turgid, often with explanations less clear than the original statement "For if the proportion of assholes in the population becomes too large (i.e., the non-asshole to asshole ratio takes a dive)..." The solutions are vague and general, with little actual practical advice, either for dealing with the asshole at work, or God help you, in your family. And certainly not for dealing with "asshole capitalism" and helping to prevent healthy capitalism from being taken over by it. The last ten pages are a letter to an asshole in the style of Horace's Epistles (actually not in their style at all), and the quotes from Horace were very refreshing in their breezy and humorous irony. They are the only reason I gave the book as many as three stars.
September 19, 2016
(Loaner from Dan)
Amusing, but goes on for a bit longer than it needs to. First half of the book is the best.
Amusing, but goes on for a bit longer than it needs to. First half of the book is the best.
May 13, 2015
“If one is special on one’s birthday, the asshole’s birthday comes every day.”
As one might expect, James begins by defining the term asshole. What is an asshole? According to James, it is someone who has an “entrenched sense of entitlement.” This someone believes himself entitled to special privileges ALL of the time as opposed to the rest of us who only believe ourselves to be entitled to special privileges SOME of the time.
James works his way through this theory with quite a bit of philosophical jargon, but the point of this is pretty obvious: he is attempting to create a theory about the word asshole — one we are all already familiar with and have our own opinions about — so he had better do it pretty systematically or we will all rip him a new, well, asshole.
This book is not really for the everyday reader. It is written in an academic, albeit a humorous academic, style complete with footnotes and enough technical language in the first few pages to scare away all but the most tenacious of average readers. That said, I did enjoy the comical paintings of everyday asshole behavior. In particular, I enjoyed chapter two, which characterizes the various types of assholes and provides us with real, modern day examples of these people — Rush Limbaugh, Kanye West, and Anne Coulter to name a few. Unfortunately, for me, that is where my enjoyment ended. Chapter three was merely an extenuation of chapter two and accomplished nothing with its tedious explanation of the modern types of assholes (as opposed to the classic types of assholes outlined in chapter two). Why did those need to be separate chapters? Is there really a difference between a more classic type of asshole and a modern type of asshole? Don’t they exhibit the same kinds of destructive behaviors? To me, this seemed like an unnecessary distinction to make, and the characterizations in chapter three were neither as enlightening nor as humorous as the ones in chapter two.
I had to force myself to read chapter four: Gender, Nature, Blame. Can assholes be both men and women? Yup! Does nature or nurture have something to do with how people become assholes? Yes, but thank you for putting written words to the thought that our gendered (binary) culture is mostly to blame here. Can we blame assholes for being assholes? Is that really a question that needs to be asked? I guess if you are a philosopher, then the answer is yes. I, however, did not need a whole chapter to tell me these things.
Okay, chapter five, you have officially lost me. Here is the chapter we’ve been waiting for — Asshole Management. It’s supposed to be helpful, thoughtful, and solve all of our assholish problems. Sorry to say that this book does not provide us with a method for dealing with these incredibly arrogant humans. James’ advice? 1. “…don’t try to change the asshole, and cooperate only on your own terms.” 2. …”take a stand at the right time.” o_0 *goes back through the whole chapter* *shakes book upside down to see if additional pages fall out*
Now, in all fairness, this book did not promise to be a how-to, and it did not promise to solve the problem of the asshole. Maybe it was too much to expect James to come up with a practical asshole management theory. Maybe.
Now that we’ve seen how assholes affect us one-on-one and in group settings, we get to see how they impact the whole world in Asshole Capitalism. Let me tell you, the idea of an asshole capitalist nation, as opposed to just a capitalist nation, is truly bleak. If asshole capitalism takes over, all of us non-asshole folks (who James calls cooperative people) will simply quit making the effort to create a better world where we stand up to assholes. We’ll let them win! I sincerely hope this never happens. In James’ opinion the United States is dangerously close to asshole capitalism — on the precipice he says. A frightening thought.
The last chapter tells us all something we already know…again. Assholes are a fact of life. The idea here is that we should reconcile ourselves to a world full of assholes, while still trying to remain cooperative people. Meaning, we should be people who stand up — in the right way and at the right time (thanks so much chapter five) — to assholes. That can’t be the end of the book, can it? No, thank God, the book ends with a letter to an asshole. At the last instant, James pulls out some additional wit and some philosophical references that actually add to his argument, rather than seeming gratuitous. The letter is fairly amusing, is posed to some asshole out there who James is trying to get to “see the light”, and ends in all sincerity with James saying he wants to save the asshole’s life.
If you are someone who enjoys modern day philosophy, if names like Kant, Rousseau, and Hobbes actually mean something to you, and if you enjoy argument for argument’s sake, then you will likely find something to take away from this book. Academicians may enjoy the systematic way James defines, and forms a universe for, the asshole. They may also enjoy the book as a break from whatever research they are currently working on. I, however, find the book obvious, repetitive, and unnecessary. In the end, all James does is gather up some rigorous language to surround the word asshole. Did we need an entire book for that? As James says, “…for many of us as regards most assholes, the appropriate maxim is: ‘Don’t waste your time.'”
As one might expect, James begins by defining the term asshole. What is an asshole? According to James, it is someone who has an “entrenched sense of entitlement.” This someone believes himself entitled to special privileges ALL of the time as opposed to the rest of us who only believe ourselves to be entitled to special privileges SOME of the time.
James works his way through this theory with quite a bit of philosophical jargon, but the point of this is pretty obvious: he is attempting to create a theory about the word asshole — one we are all already familiar with and have our own opinions about — so he had better do it pretty systematically or we will all rip him a new, well, asshole.
This book is not really for the everyday reader. It is written in an academic, albeit a humorous academic, style complete with footnotes and enough technical language in the first few pages to scare away all but the most tenacious of average readers. That said, I did enjoy the comical paintings of everyday asshole behavior. In particular, I enjoyed chapter two, which characterizes the various types of assholes and provides us with real, modern day examples of these people — Rush Limbaugh, Kanye West, and Anne Coulter to name a few. Unfortunately, for me, that is where my enjoyment ended. Chapter three was merely an extenuation of chapter two and accomplished nothing with its tedious explanation of the modern types of assholes (as opposed to the classic types of assholes outlined in chapter two). Why did those need to be separate chapters? Is there really a difference between a more classic type of asshole and a modern type of asshole? Don’t they exhibit the same kinds of destructive behaviors? To me, this seemed like an unnecessary distinction to make, and the characterizations in chapter three were neither as enlightening nor as humorous as the ones in chapter two.
I had to force myself to read chapter four: Gender, Nature, Blame. Can assholes be both men and women? Yup! Does nature or nurture have something to do with how people become assholes? Yes, but thank you for putting written words to the thought that our gendered (binary) culture is mostly to blame here. Can we blame assholes for being assholes? Is that really a question that needs to be asked? I guess if you are a philosopher, then the answer is yes. I, however, did not need a whole chapter to tell me these things.
Okay, chapter five, you have officially lost me. Here is the chapter we’ve been waiting for — Asshole Management. It’s supposed to be helpful, thoughtful, and solve all of our assholish problems. Sorry to say that this book does not provide us with a method for dealing with these incredibly arrogant humans. James’ advice? 1. “…don’t try to change the asshole, and cooperate only on your own terms.” 2. …”take a stand at the right time.” o_0 *goes back through the whole chapter* *shakes book upside down to see if additional pages fall out*
Now, in all fairness, this book did not promise to be a how-to, and it did not promise to solve the problem of the asshole. Maybe it was too much to expect James to come up with a practical asshole management theory. Maybe.
Now that we’ve seen how assholes affect us one-on-one and in group settings, we get to see how they impact the whole world in Asshole Capitalism. Let me tell you, the idea of an asshole capitalist nation, as opposed to just a capitalist nation, is truly bleak. If asshole capitalism takes over, all of us non-asshole folks (who James calls cooperative people) will simply quit making the effort to create a better world where we stand up to assholes. We’ll let them win! I sincerely hope this never happens. In James’ opinion the United States is dangerously close to asshole capitalism — on the precipice he says. A frightening thought.
The last chapter tells us all something we already know…again. Assholes are a fact of life. The idea here is that we should reconcile ourselves to a world full of assholes, while still trying to remain cooperative people. Meaning, we should be people who stand up — in the right way and at the right time (thanks so much chapter five) — to assholes. That can’t be the end of the book, can it? No, thank God, the book ends with a letter to an asshole. At the last instant, James pulls out some additional wit and some philosophical references that actually add to his argument, rather than seeming gratuitous. The letter is fairly amusing, is posed to some asshole out there who James is trying to get to “see the light”, and ends in all sincerity with James saying he wants to save the asshole’s life.
If you are someone who enjoys modern day philosophy, if names like Kant, Rousseau, and Hobbes actually mean something to you, and if you enjoy argument for argument’s sake, then you will likely find something to take away from this book. Academicians may enjoy the systematic way James defines, and forms a universe for, the asshole. They may also enjoy the book as a break from whatever research they are currently working on. I, however, find the book obvious, repetitive, and unnecessary. In the end, all James does is gather up some rigorous language to surround the word asshole. Did we need an entire book for that? As James says, “…for many of us as regards most assholes, the appropriate maxim is: ‘Don’t waste your time.'”
September 11, 2012
This is a tongue and cheek philosophical theory of what makes someone an asshole. James comes up with irritating traits of assholes such as “not hearing someone out” and “reflecting ignorance of crucial facts or lack of concern with what is reasonably acceptable from everyone’s point of view and actively reasoning from his sense of entitlement rather than from an independent understanding of what the moral law requires”. After defining an asshole he creates categories such as the Boorish Asshole, the Royal Royal Asshole, the Presidential Asshole, the Corporate Asshole and the Asshole Boss to name a few which he considers the group that “shares a thick sense of moral entitlement”. And then he talks about a newer style of assholes where “the rationalizations are becoming ever thinner” such as The Cable News Asshole and the Delusional Asshole Banker. Of course, he has well known names to back up his categories, but I won’t post them here in case other assholes come out of the woodwork and want to give me their thoughts on my review.
Mr. James has many footnotes with several references to The New York Times, CNN and many books either written by or about the assholes themselves. His general advice to people that come across an asshole is resignation that “assholes are a given fact of life” and that resistance is futile because “no amount of angry protest will get a true asshole to listen”. Perhaps the most amusing part of this book is James’ “Letter to an Asshole” written in the spirit of Horace’s epistles.
Despite reading the word asshole so many times in this book, I found this to be an enjoyable read. It will make me think philosophically about the kind of asshole I am listening to and resign myself to the idea that he will probably never change.
Thank you to Mr. James, Doubleday Publishing, and Net Galley for giving me the opportunity to review this book.
Mr. James has many footnotes with several references to The New York Times, CNN and many books either written by or about the assholes themselves. His general advice to people that come across an asshole is resignation that “assholes are a given fact of life” and that resistance is futile because “no amount of angry protest will get a true asshole to listen”. Perhaps the most amusing part of this book is James’ “Letter to an Asshole” written in the spirit of Horace’s epistles.
Despite reading the word asshole so many times in this book, I found this to be an enjoyable read. It will make me think philosophically about the kind of asshole I am listening to and resign myself to the idea that he will probably never change.
Thank you to Mr. James, Doubleday Publishing, and Net Galley for giving me the opportunity to review this book.
July 7, 2017
This was just horrible. It started off good...but like most academic ventures that try to appeal to a wide audience and be funny...it completely failed. I couldn't determine if the author was being serious in his philosophic defining of an asshole or if he was being sarcastic throughout...whatever it was...it sucked. It got so longwinded and completely off point that I couldn't even make it through a paragraph without skimming. The main point of this book from my standpoint: this asshole loves to hear himself talk and appear smarter than all the rest of the "typical assholes".
December 5, 2012
While Aaron James'
Assholes: A Theory
may be (to use his own terminology) "pop philosophy", it is not an unserious work. There is an assumption that the reader has some familiarity with moral theories, but James does what he can to address less introductory matters -- such as the argument against the possibility of 'free will' (and now suffering through Tamler Sommers'
A Very Bad Wizard
has paid off) -- in a manner that allows the average reader to follow the tract of the book.
It is not meant as humor, though James does allow himself to write in a much more relaxed style than would be required in an academic treatise. Instead, it is an honest examination of the asshole and his impact on society, particularly on the economic side. I have a suspicion that I would have been happier with a more thorough, more academically minded presentation of the topic, but I will also acknowledge that such an effort would have no prospects of reaching the average person. More than that, it would undoubtedly require more than a handful of days to read and be one of those texts that demands ownership (because marking up a book owned by a friend or library is a truly asshole move).
My one complaint is that I believe James misunderstands the role the psychopath plays in the advancement of the asshole agenda. I am not an expert on the subject (by any stretch of the imagination), but my estimation is that James misunderstands the role of the psychopath's lack of empathy when constructing his argument about moral judgments. (My near complaint is that James never addresses the Otto character from A Fish Called Wanda when bringing up calling others assholes from the safety of the car.)
It is not meant as humor, though James does allow himself to write in a much more relaxed style than would be required in an academic treatise. Instead, it is an honest examination of the asshole and his impact on society, particularly on the economic side. I have a suspicion that I would have been happier with a more thorough, more academically minded presentation of the topic, but I will also acknowledge that such an effort would have no prospects of reaching the average person. More than that, it would undoubtedly require more than a handful of days to read and be one of those texts that demands ownership (because marking up a book owned by a friend or library is a truly asshole move).
My one complaint is that I believe James misunderstands the role the psychopath plays in the advancement of the asshole agenda. I am not an expert on the subject (by any stretch of the imagination), but my estimation is that James misunderstands the role of the psychopath's lack of empathy when constructing his argument about moral judgments. (My near complaint is that James never addresses the Otto character from A Fish Called Wanda when bringing up calling others assholes from the safety of the car.)
August 26, 2018
Obviously, given the current asshole proliferation, not enough people have read James' discourse and dissection of assholery.
January 4, 2017
Assholes: A Theory, is actually a rather remarkable book, more for the feat it manages to pull off than its actual content, which is also pretty fine.
Here's the premise, and one with which we are all familiar: there are assholes in the world, and they are deeply annoying. Not the least of their negative qualities is that they don't particularly care if they are classified as such, so our criticism of them most often falls on deaf ears and elicits condescending responses.
Aaron James was faced with this dilemma quite often in pursuit of his passion: surfing. To hear him tell it, assholes tend to be rather over-represented in that sport. Being a philosopher by profession, the avenue of recourse most open to him was a tongue-in-cheek thesis on what constitutes this condition and what the rest of us might do about it.
Of course, this is not a serious treatise on human behavior meant to be taken seriously by his fellow philosophers. (For one thing, I suspect the terminology would need to be more academically rigorous: perhaps noncooperative moral cripple?). But as this is his milieu, it seems to be beyond Mr. James's power to write an entirely unserious book. And I, for one, am very glad he could not.
Because we all encounter assholes, some of us on a daily basis. Professions in which they proliferate include, of course, medicine, politics, finance, and law, so many of us have recourse to their egocentric blandishments quite often. And even those lucky few who work in an environment where they are less likely to crop up (one would think a group of food bank volunteers would be unlikely to produce many) must contend with them in some arena or another: in stores, in traffic, in line, in restaurants. They are everywhere.
And whereas this book begins as a lark, it ends up giving us some very valuable insights into the nature of being an asshole, ways of coping with assholism, the futility of strategies to change one, and the way forward in a life strewn with them. One is tempted, for instance, to employ the tried and true technique of saying that one does not know how to define an asshole, but knows one when seen. Yet James bravely wades into this potential quagmire and gives us a very cogent description, speaking to his (or her, though, sadly, most assholes are men) sense of entitlement, demands to special privilege, and immunity from criticism. This rings so entirely true as to seem immediately to scratch the itch many of us have felt to define the terms of what bugs us so very much about this subspecies of human being. And in defining the asshole thus, he carefully makes a distinction between closely related beings: the mere "jerk, schmuck, or douche bag". On the other extreme, he also does us the good turn of distinguishing the asshole from the true psychopath, whom he very nearly resembles. Very helpful, indeed.
As I mentioned before, one of his most useful contributions is to give us the tools to deal with these creatures. He advises that we not delude ourselves that assholes can, by and large, be changed in any substantial way. Indeed, the true asshole may well use a seeming conversion to take further advantage of you (though this might be more a psychopath's move). On the other hand, since part of what infuriates us about them is the lack of moral recognition they provide us, he does not advise silence in the face of asshole behavior, but emphasizes the need for us to be clear as to our motives: it is for us and not him that we speak up, the "us" being the collective non-asshole members of society. It is worthwhile to make it clear to those around you that one of this persuasion has been spotted and clearly identified. It allows us a degree of agency and recognition, just not in the eyes of the asshole himself.
This clever book is definitely worth your time. James is erudite, well-informed, a good writer, and a fine companion. If you don't find something here that will serve you well in life, you might want to consider that you just might be...well, you know.
Here's the premise, and one with which we are all familiar: there are assholes in the world, and they are deeply annoying. Not the least of their negative qualities is that they don't particularly care if they are classified as such, so our criticism of them most often falls on deaf ears and elicits condescending responses.
Aaron James was faced with this dilemma quite often in pursuit of his passion: surfing. To hear him tell it, assholes tend to be rather over-represented in that sport. Being a philosopher by profession, the avenue of recourse most open to him was a tongue-in-cheek thesis on what constitutes this condition and what the rest of us might do about it.
Of course, this is not a serious treatise on human behavior meant to be taken seriously by his fellow philosophers. (For one thing, I suspect the terminology would need to be more academically rigorous: perhaps noncooperative moral cripple?). But as this is his milieu, it seems to be beyond Mr. James's power to write an entirely unserious book. And I, for one, am very glad he could not.
Because we all encounter assholes, some of us on a daily basis. Professions in which they proliferate include, of course, medicine, politics, finance, and law, so many of us have recourse to their egocentric blandishments quite often. And even those lucky few who work in an environment where they are less likely to crop up (one would think a group of food bank volunteers would be unlikely to produce many) must contend with them in some arena or another: in stores, in traffic, in line, in restaurants. They are everywhere.
And whereas this book begins as a lark, it ends up giving us some very valuable insights into the nature of being an asshole, ways of coping with assholism, the futility of strategies to change one, and the way forward in a life strewn with them. One is tempted, for instance, to employ the tried and true technique of saying that one does not know how to define an asshole, but knows one when seen. Yet James bravely wades into this potential quagmire and gives us a very cogent description, speaking to his (or her, though, sadly, most assholes are men) sense of entitlement, demands to special privilege, and immunity from criticism. This rings so entirely true as to seem immediately to scratch the itch many of us have felt to define the terms of what bugs us so very much about this subspecies of human being. And in defining the asshole thus, he carefully makes a distinction between closely related beings: the mere "jerk, schmuck, or douche bag". On the other extreme, he also does us the good turn of distinguishing the asshole from the true psychopath, whom he very nearly resembles. Very helpful, indeed.
As I mentioned before, one of his most useful contributions is to give us the tools to deal with these creatures. He advises that we not delude ourselves that assholes can, by and large, be changed in any substantial way. Indeed, the true asshole may well use a seeming conversion to take further advantage of you (though this might be more a psychopath's move). On the other hand, since part of what infuriates us about them is the lack of moral recognition they provide us, he does not advise silence in the face of asshole behavior, but emphasizes the need for us to be clear as to our motives: it is for us and not him that we speak up, the "us" being the collective non-asshole members of society. It is worthwhile to make it clear to those around you that one of this persuasion has been spotted and clearly identified. It allows us a degree of agency and recognition, just not in the eyes of the asshole himself.
This clever book is definitely worth your time. James is erudite, well-informed, a good writer, and a fine companion. If you don't find something here that will serve you well in life, you might want to consider that you just might be...well, you know.
August 13, 2017
Assholes: A Theory?
Call me when it’s a Theorem!
2.5 stars
[To appreciate the effort, I chose 3 stars, instead of 2]
I really wanted to like this book. I picked this one because of the interesting title, but this is not as funny as I thought it would be. The first part is good, there is humor, and his commentaries made some sense, but in the second part, humor goes a little dry and makes the reader feels like it is a bit longer than it needs to.
I thought there's going to be an amazing analysis and profound psychological perspective on assholes — and when I say amazing and profound, I mean like what Harry.G.Frankfurt did with 'On Bullshit' — but there wasn't. It was not much insightful for me. I do appreciate author's efforts though. It was a fun read anyway.
Call me when it’s a Theorem!
2.5 stars
[To appreciate the effort, I chose 3 stars, instead of 2]
I really wanted to like this book. I picked this one because of the interesting title, but this is not as funny as I thought it would be. The first part is good, there is humor, and his commentaries made some sense, but in the second part, humor goes a little dry and makes the reader feels like it is a bit longer than it needs to.
I thought there's going to be an amazing analysis and profound psychological perspective on assholes — and when I say amazing and profound, I mean like what Harry.G.Frankfurt did with 'On Bullshit' — but there wasn't. It was not much insightful for me. I do appreciate author's efforts though. It was a fun read anyway.
January 4, 2015
The problem with “Assholes – A Theory,” by Aaron James is that it’s too dumb to be smart and too academic to be funny. I came into the book with high expectations, mainly based on the title. The thought process went something like “I dislike assholes, but assholes can be funny! A whole book that explains (and presumably lightheartedly pokes fun at) assholes will be a nice holiday read as I sip on eggnog and enjoy a light buzz!” Instead, I plodded through about 200 pages of philosophy-ese to take in a concept that would have been much better packaged as an enjoyable think-piece in a semi-serious magazine.
To save you the bother, the book defines an asshole as somebody that allows themselves systematic special privileges out of an entrenched sense of entitlement, and then uses their sense of entitlement to rationalize their behavior in the face of valid complaints of others. As the author quips, “if one is special on one’s birthday, the asshole’s birthday comes every day.” For me, defining the asshole was the most useful nugget of the book because it makes it a lot easier to replay encounters in my life and analyze whether any of the actions taken were “asshole moves.” Upon self-reflection, I’ve also been able to confirm that I’m not an asshole.
However, after grasping the concept of the asshole, this book offers severely diminishing returns in subsequent chapters. Chapter two was pretty fun – James got the hatchet out and started chopping down assholes, but subsequent chapters dial way too heavily into territory I thought I had escaped after college. Notably, I thought the part of my life where I had to care about the moral theories of Immanuel Kant and Thomas Hobbes was over. Well, actually it is, so the back half of the book was a pretty quick skim session.
With little else to discuss of substance, the book meanders into irrelevant discussions making distinctions between assholes, psychopaths, and bitches and tosses in a section on “asshole management” that takes the book off of the path (albeit a boring path) of an academic analysis of assholes into an HR how-to. In short, “Assholes” should have cut the bullshit and been done with it after Chapter 2.
June 13, 2016
Although James can be very repetitive and prone to beanplating terms & situations in the manner of many philosophically inclined folk, there are some things I enjoyed about this book.
First, his definition of what it is to be an asshole (as opposed to an assclown or a buffoon, for example) is delightfully precise: an asshole believes systematically that he is entitled to special privileges, has an entrenched sense of entitlement, and doesn't hear other people's complaints about him because his entitlement is systematic and entrenched.
Second, at the very end of this book, James writes a letter directly to the asshole that contrasts the asshole's entrenched systematic entitlement as motivation for behavior with Kant's categorical imperative code of morality in a sort of brilliant way that pokes holes at the asshole's ability to believe the way he behaves is right.
Third, I learned from the chapter on gender (aka "why most assholes are men") that the woman about whom I tend to think "what an asshole!" five out of seven days of the week is actually, more precisely, a bitch, since she acknowledges complaints made about her behavior to the face of the complainer -- which is something an asshole would not do -- and then continues to behave as if the complaints were never made.
I'd recommended this book to philosophy undergraduates and anyone who might get a laugh from seeing the subject of philosophical argument pervasively referred to as "the asshole."
First, his definition of what it is to be an asshole (as opposed to an assclown or a buffoon, for example) is delightfully precise: an asshole believes systematically that he is entitled to special privileges, has an entrenched sense of entitlement, and doesn't hear other people's complaints about him because his entitlement is systematic and entrenched.
Second, at the very end of this book, James writes a letter directly to the asshole that contrasts the asshole's entrenched systematic entitlement as motivation for behavior with Kant's categorical imperative code of morality in a sort of brilliant way that pokes holes at the asshole's ability to believe the way he behaves is right.
Third, I learned from the chapter on gender (aka "why most assholes are men") that the woman about whom I tend to think "what an asshole!" five out of seven days of the week is actually, more precisely, a bitch, since she acknowledges complaints made about her behavior to the face of the complainer -- which is something an asshole would not do -- and then continues to behave as if the complaints were never made.
I'd recommended this book to philosophy undergraduates and anyone who might get a laugh from seeing the subject of philosophical argument pervasively referred to as "the asshole."
June 24, 2016
Aaron James attempts to define "assholes" as an initial step towards successfully interacting with them. According to James, an asshole is a person who "allows himself to enjoy special advantages in social relations out of an entrenched sense of entitlement that immunizes him against the complaints of other people." Assholes take advantage of cooperation among people to derive extra personal benefits, beyond their apportioned share, and they usually have what sounds like a moral argument to back their claim ("I'm a manager/rich/important/a celebrity/a banker") so that well meaning people back off and let them cut in line, take bonuses they don't deserve, treat people poorly, take credit and leave the work to everyone else, post selfies about how shameless they are, etc.
James perfectly defines the asshole and the problems that arise from trying to cope with him. Non-assholes struggle to cooperate in the wake of assholery, because the asshole is worse than a free-rider. He (usually the asshole is a dude, but ladies are not exempt, for reasons James covers at length) takes extra benefits, and if called out, the asshole gives a moral-sounding reason that he truly believes is beyond reproach, and uses it to discount any arguments to the contrary. Some non-assholes overreact and want to punish the asshole, drawing ire from the calmer quadrants of the group. Some people want to pretend it didn't happen or was a one-time occurrence. Others withdraw. Cooperation is damaged, gets more costly, and the asshole often pits people against one another to continue reaping slightly more benefits than they are entitled to, and everyone else is divided or at best acquiesces to forebear the asshole.
Another side effect is that since the asshole successfully gets away with his entitlements, this encourages others to act more entitled. The group is only galvanized when the asshole acts in the open in front of everyone. Usually, the asshole thrives in gray areas and stops well short of illegality or psychopathy. The asshole slowly degrades group cooperation, creating an entitled and needlessly competitive environment of treating others poorly for slight personal gains. On a macro level, this erodes societal institutions that require fundamental cooperation, even in a capitalist democracy, which is founded on the promise of people working hard to gain their share of the wealth produced. The capitalist democracy then fails to deliver on its promises, since the assholes reap more of the benefits without bounds. Hard-working people get left out, because they are "unlucky/not as talented/rich/important." Society then degrades into asshole capitalism, wherein the majority of people act in a self-seeking manner, "trying to get theirs and not be a sucker to some asshole."
The book ends bleakly, since James is short on methods for dealing with his aptly defined subject. James' solution is cooperate, pick your battles, try not to withdraw, work with the asshole only on your own terms, speak out on behalf of others when the asshole goes after them, and don't waste much time on trying to manage the asshole. The book was written in 2012, and speaks about a turning point in North America: assholes are proliferating and pushing an entitlement agenda, but it can be reversed. This seems naive given who is successfully running for US president this year.
The only solution seems to be to read James' book in order that groups of different people with divergent viewpoints can more quickly recognize the asshole in their midst, and cooperate quicker and more effectively to damper his effects, if not manage him.
I would have liked less definition of the asshole (a bit belabored at 190 pages) and more strategies (too short at 20 pages). Maybe James did his job well, and I am simply depressed by his conclusions.
If you think you are dealing with an asshole, I would recommend reading chapters 5-7, since the meat of the definition and attempts at asshole management are contained there. If you have a philosophical bent, read the entire book.
James perfectly defines the asshole and the problems that arise from trying to cope with him. Non-assholes struggle to cooperate in the wake of assholery, because the asshole is worse than a free-rider. He (usually the asshole is a dude, but ladies are not exempt, for reasons James covers at length) takes extra benefits, and if called out, the asshole gives a moral-sounding reason that he truly believes is beyond reproach, and uses it to discount any arguments to the contrary. Some non-assholes overreact and want to punish the asshole, drawing ire from the calmer quadrants of the group. Some people want to pretend it didn't happen or was a one-time occurrence. Others withdraw. Cooperation is damaged, gets more costly, and the asshole often pits people against one another to continue reaping slightly more benefits than they are entitled to, and everyone else is divided or at best acquiesces to forebear the asshole.
Another side effect is that since the asshole successfully gets away with his entitlements, this encourages others to act more entitled. The group is only galvanized when the asshole acts in the open in front of everyone. Usually, the asshole thrives in gray areas and stops well short of illegality or psychopathy. The asshole slowly degrades group cooperation, creating an entitled and needlessly competitive environment of treating others poorly for slight personal gains. On a macro level, this erodes societal institutions that require fundamental cooperation, even in a capitalist democracy, which is founded on the promise of people working hard to gain their share of the wealth produced. The capitalist democracy then fails to deliver on its promises, since the assholes reap more of the benefits without bounds. Hard-working people get left out, because they are "unlucky/not as talented/rich/important." Society then degrades into asshole capitalism, wherein the majority of people act in a self-seeking manner, "trying to get theirs and not be a sucker to some asshole."
The book ends bleakly, since James is short on methods for dealing with his aptly defined subject. James' solution is cooperate, pick your battles, try not to withdraw, work with the asshole only on your own terms, speak out on behalf of others when the asshole goes after them, and don't waste much time on trying to manage the asshole. The book was written in 2012, and speaks about a turning point in North America: assholes are proliferating and pushing an entitlement agenda, but it can be reversed. This seems naive given who is successfully running for US president this year.
The only solution seems to be to read James' book in order that groups of different people with divergent viewpoints can more quickly recognize the asshole in their midst, and cooperate quicker and more effectively to damper his effects, if not manage him.
I would have liked less definition of the asshole (a bit belabored at 190 pages) and more strategies (too short at 20 pages). Maybe James did his job well, and I am simply depressed by his conclusions.
If you think you are dealing with an asshole, I would recommend reading chapters 5-7, since the meat of the definition and attempts at asshole management are contained there. If you have a philosophical bent, read the entire book.
December 7, 2015
This seems to be an interesting article that swelled unhelpfully into a book. "Assholes" does a good job of defining a particular kind of social misbehaviour: the arrogating of undeserved privilege to oneself, while expecting others to behave morally, due to an unjustifiable sense of specialness that, in one's view, warrants such extraordinary behaviour. The asshole is thus usefully distinguished from the sociopath.
The book also shows why dealing with such people is so difficult: remonstrating with them is almost always ineffective because they seem genuinely to think that they are morally right, but merely letting them have their way is both unjust and irritating. Their preference for the moral grey zones, rather than out-and-out abuse, makes them harder still to counter.
So where do such people come from? What can we do about them? You'd think that in an entire book some good answers would be given, but for all his learning (and James, who holds a Harvard PhD in philosophy and teaches at UC-Irvine, quotes many of the usual suspects of western ethics with facility), the book delivers precious little. Indeed, one wonders if a philosopher really is the right sort of person to tackle such questions, instead of a psychologist or sociologist.
Most interesting to me is James's explicit recognition that if one holds to a Christian view of divine sovereignty over the world, one can reconcile oneself much more easily to such apparently intractable evils knowing that (a) God will eventually deal with them justly; (b) they currently are allowed by God to continue in order to serve his mysterious but benevolent purposes; and therefore (c) we ought simply do the best we can to deal with them from time to time without feeling obliged to "solve" them.
James's secularism, alas, keeps him from allowing that this sort of Christian view is a "real" way of construing the world. Instead, his explicitly Rawlsian ethics leaves him doomed to merely hope that somehow decency eventually will out--and even to hope, rather touchingly, but against almost everything he has previously argued, that the occasional asshole might actually attend to the sort of argument he puts rather well (if also wordily) in his concluding "Letter to an Asshole."
If one wants an extended glimpse, therefore, into the fatal shortcomings of contemporary secularist liberal ethics, this book serves as an unintentional but admirably lucid example. If one wants help dealing with this particular brand of nasty person, however, one must look elsewhere: as James himself comes close to intimating, perhaps to the quite different ethical tradition sourced in the Bible.
The book also shows why dealing with such people is so difficult: remonstrating with them is almost always ineffective because they seem genuinely to think that they are morally right, but merely letting them have their way is both unjust and irritating. Their preference for the moral grey zones, rather than out-and-out abuse, makes them harder still to counter.
So where do such people come from? What can we do about them? You'd think that in an entire book some good answers would be given, but for all his learning (and James, who holds a Harvard PhD in philosophy and teaches at UC-Irvine, quotes many of the usual suspects of western ethics with facility), the book delivers precious little. Indeed, one wonders if a philosopher really is the right sort of person to tackle such questions, instead of a psychologist or sociologist.
Most interesting to me is James's explicit recognition that if one holds to a Christian view of divine sovereignty over the world, one can reconcile oneself much more easily to such apparently intractable evils knowing that (a) God will eventually deal with them justly; (b) they currently are allowed by God to continue in order to serve his mysterious but benevolent purposes; and therefore (c) we ought simply do the best we can to deal with them from time to time without feeling obliged to "solve" them.
James's secularism, alas, keeps him from allowing that this sort of Christian view is a "real" way of construing the world. Instead, his explicitly Rawlsian ethics leaves him doomed to merely hope that somehow decency eventually will out--and even to hope, rather touchingly, but against almost everything he has previously argued, that the occasional asshole might actually attend to the sort of argument he puts rather well (if also wordily) in his concluding "Letter to an Asshole."
If one wants an extended glimpse, therefore, into the fatal shortcomings of contemporary secularist liberal ethics, this book serves as an unintentional but admirably lucid example. If one wants help dealing with this particular brand of nasty person, however, one must look elsewhere: as James himself comes close to intimating, perhaps to the quite different ethical tradition sourced in the Bible.
October 25, 2016
This book takes a serious look at how to define an asshole, defends the premise, marshaling and then addressing criticisms against the proposed definition, and all backed up with references. That is, despite it's amusing title, this book is not actually humor. I found it to be an educational and carefully considered treatise, well worth my time in reading. James makes cogent distinctions between assholes, psychopaths, and run-of-the-mill jerks.
February 1, 2013
I had expected an informative and lively discussion but got instead a "scientific", dry tome, laden with footnotes on nearly every page. This is a small, short book whose subject matter could have been handled as a magazine article. Repetitive and overdone and more than I wanted to know.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 690 reviews