The phrase “academic bullshit” presents compositionists with a special dilemma. Because compositionists study, teach, and produce academic writing, they are open to the accusation that they both tolerate and perpetuate academic bullshit. We argue that confronting this problem must begin with a careful definition of “bullshit” and “academic bullshit.” In contrast to Harry Frankfurt’s checklist method of definition, we examine “bullshit” as a graded category. We suggest that some varieties of academic bullshit may be both unavoidable and beneficial.

Abstract This article takes the form of a dialogue between traditional rhetoric and cognitive rhetoric, offering complementary readings of rhetoric and figuration in President George W. Bush's 2002 State of the Union Address, the so‐called “axis of evil” speech. Traditional and cognitive rhetorics differ most markedly in their approach to metaphor, metonymy, and other figures. This dialogue brings important differences into focus and, at the same time, demonstrates the potential of combining approaches. In addition to metonymy and metaphor, it discusses blending theory, acutezze, and related questions.