Draft:Obscurantism
Cogito ergo sum Logic and rhetoric |
![]() |
Key articles |
General logic |
Bad logic |
“”The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir.
|
—Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark |
Obscurantism or obscurationism (from the Latin obscuritas, "darkness, incomprehensibility") is the act deliberately suppressing of facts or full details in a given context. There are two main forms of obscurantism; political obscurantism (aka social obscurantism) and philosophical obscurantism (aka intellectual obscurantism). The first being characterized as suppression of knowledge or education; which is used authorities, institutions, or individuals intentionally hide information or distort facts to mislead the public or maintain control. The other is characterized by deliberate obscurity in communication; which is when someone uses overly complex, vague, or ambiguous language to obscure meaning, making ideas difficult to understand—sometimes to appear more intelligent or authoritative.
Obscurantism is generally considered an anti-intellectual rhetorical device.[1] It is distinguished from fallacy of ambiguity in that obscurantism is an intentional strategy to obscure understanding, while fallacy of ambiguity is typically either unintentional or due to sloppy reasoning rather than a deliberate attempt to confuse.
Origins[edit]
Although based on a Latin word with concept being talked about by Aristotle, the term "obscurantism" emerged proper from the title of the satirical work Epistolæ Obscurorum Virorum (Letters of Obscure Men) from circa 1515–19. The book is based on the intellectual dispute between the German humanist Johann Reuchlin
and the converted Jew Johannes Pfefferkorn
over whether all Jewish books should be burned. Pfefferkorn had been granted permission by Maximilian I
in 1509 to burn all copies of the Jewish Talmud in the Holy Roman Empire; with the satire mocking Pfefferkorn's arguments for burning non-Christian works.[2]
In the 18th century during the Age of Enlightenment, philosophers used the term to refer to enemies of intellectual enlightenment and the spread of knowledge. In the 19th century, a distinction was made between obscurantism in metaphysics and theology.[3]
In Philosophy[edit]
Aristotelianism[edit]
Although Aristotle himself proclaimed to be the champion of reason and clarity, there's been scrutiny regarding his contributions to the art of obscurantism. Actually, as early as in 5th century, Aristotle had been accused of of being an obscurantist by Neo-Platonist Ammonius Hermiae. Long after his death, Aristotle's philosophy was used - particularly by religious institutions during medieval times - in (political) obscurantist ways; to control knowledge, suppress dissent, and maintain intellectual orthodoxy.
Firstly, in connection to medieval scholasticism and religious control. In the Middle Ages, Aristotle's writings were brought back to Europe, largely through Islamic scholars such as Averroes
and Avicenna. Subsequently scholastic thinkers, particularly Thomas Aquinas, would combine Aristotle's ideas with Christian teachings. But over time, Aristotelianism turned into something rigid, where his writings were seen as "the absolute truth" rather than just thoughts to be examined. Because of this, church leaders blocked ideas that went against Aristotle or that used his work in ways that didn’t fit their religious beliefs; such as with Galileo and his heliocentric theory.
The strict following of Aristotle and the refusal to accept new scientific ideas was viewed by thinkers during the Enlightenment as a type of obscurantism. Enlightenment thinkers such as Kant, Voltaire, and Diderot viewed medieval Aristotelianism as mystifying and a hindrance to progress. They linked Aristotle's scholastic tradition with opaque reasoning, rigid hierarchy, and the suppression of critical inquiry. To them, obscurantism meant the use of complicated, abstract, and overly formal language by scholastic philosophers who highly respected Aristotle.[4][5]
Additionally in modern times, Aristotle's virtue ethics has drawn some criticisms overlap with obscurantist concerns. Issues regarding lack of clear action-guidance, dependency on tradition or community standards (with the the lack of universality being evasive or opaque; opening doors for relativism, insularity, and/or elitism) and the conceptual murkiness in defining the "Idealized Moral Agent".[6][7][8]
Kantianism[edit]
Ironically, despite his opposition towards obscurantism, Kantian philosophy is accused on being obscurantist.
TBA
Hegelianism[edit]
TBA
Marxism[edit]
TBA
Heidegger[edit]
TBA
Postmodernism[edit]
TBA
In Politics[edit]
Leo Strauss[edit]
TBA
In Pseudoscience[edit]
“”With the idol of certainty (including that of degrees of imperfect certainty or probability) there falls one of the defences of obscurantism which bar the way of scientific advance. For the worship of this idol hampers not only the boldness of our questions, but also the rigour and the integrity of our tests. The wrong view of science betrays itself in the craving to be right; for it is not his possession of knowledge, of irrefutable truth, that makes the man of science, but his persistent and recklessly critical quest for truth.
|
—Sir Karl Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery |
Pseudoscience and obscurantism go hand in hand, since the former can be used to obscure real scientific understanding by promoting false or misleading claims that appear credible but lack scientific rigor. Psuedoscience thrives when access to genuine scientific knowledge is limited, or when people are discouraged from critical thinking. For example; an authoritarian country suppressing real science in favor of ideologically acceptable but false beliefs - resulting in such nonsense like Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union.[9][10] In addition, the obscurantian techniques of confusing language, appeal to authority and/or emotional manipulation are used to avoid scrutiny and thus keep people uninformed or misinformed, either intentionally or through neglect.[11][12]
In addition, obscurantism and science denialism can reinforce each other. This is particularly visible in authoritarian or ideologically rigid environments, when its used to control public discourse (rejecting evolution in favor of religious narratives) for sake of political or financial interests (denying climate change to protect fossil fuel industries) and to undermine opposition (labeling dissenting scientists as “elites” or “unpatriotic”). As such, by muddling or hiding scientific truths, you make people question or reject science. By attacking intellectualism or expertise, denialism seems empowering or independent. And by promoting conspiracy or mysticism, pseudoscience fills the void left by real science.[13][14][15]
Notes[edit]
References[edit]
- ↑ Kjeldgaard-Christiansen, J. (2023). Obscurantism in Academic Writing: What It Is and Why It Is Bad. Leviathan: Interdisciplinary Journal in English, (9). https://doi.org/10.7146/lev92023136279
- ↑ Bozman, Ernest Franklin, ed. (1967). Everyman's Encyclopaedia. Vol. 9 (5 ed.). J. M. Dent & Sons. p. 261.
- ↑ Buekens, F. and Boudry, M. (2015), The dark side of the loon. Theoria, 81: 126-142. https://doi.org/10.1111/theo.12047
- ↑ ten Hagen, S. (2025). "Chapter 5 Scholasticism as a Scholarly Vice Term: from the Middle Ages to the Twenty-First Century". In Vices of the Learned. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004725058_006
- ↑ Ott, Walter, 'The Rejection of Aristotelianism', Causation and Laws of Nature in Early Modern Philosophy (Oxford, 2009; online edn, Oxford Academic, 1 Sept. 2009), https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199570430.003.0006, accessed 16 Oct. 2025.
- ↑ Austin, N. (2017). Normative Virtue Theory in Theological Ethics. Religions, 8(10), 211. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel8100211
- ↑ Begley AM. Practising virtue: a challenge to the view that a virtue centred approach to ethics lacks practical content. Nurs Ethics. 2005 Nov;12(6):622-37. doi: 10.1191/0969733005ne832oa. PMID: 16312090.
- ↑ Svensson, Frans, and Jens Johansson, 'Objections to Virtue Ethics', in Nancy E. Snow (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Virtue, Oxford Handbooks (2018; online edn, Oxford Academic, 6 Dec. 2017), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199385195.013.39, accessed 16 Oct. 2025.
- ↑ Vasily V. Ptushenko, The pushback against state interference in science: how Lysenkoism tried to suppress Genetics and how it was eventually defeated, Genetics, Volume 219, Issue 4, December 2021, iyab162, https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/iyab162
- ↑ Michael D. Gordin, “Lysenkoism,” Encyclopedia of the History of Science (February 2022) doi: 10.34758/d5bq-k368
- ↑ Sagan, Carl (1997). The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. Random House Publishing Group. ISBN 9780345409461.
- ↑ Pigliucci, Massimo (2010). Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 9780226667874.
- ↑ McIntyre, Lee (2020). The Scientific Attitude: Defending Science from Denial, Fraud, and Pseudoscience. MIT Press. ISBN 9780262538930.
- ↑ Godulla, A., Seibert, D., & Klute, T. (2024). What Is Denialism? An Examination and Classification of Definitional Approaches and Relevant Actors. Journalism and Media, 5(1), 135-147. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia5010010
- ↑ Hansson SO. Science denial as a form of pseudoscience. Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2017 Jun;63:39-47. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2017.05.002. Epub 2017 May 31. PMID: 28629651.