Do some continental philosophers deliberately obfuscate their writing? Why?

Question

Some claim that certain continental philosophers deliberately write in a muddled (obscure, complicated) style; because they believe that to truly understand some ideas, a reader of philosophy should struggle with the text, fight through it, repeatedly trying to re-interpret mysterious sentences. They also say that the practice probably originated with Kierkegaard. Did any continental philosopher admit to such practice? For those who did not admit so, who could confidently state that did? When did this practice start? What would be their exact reasons for the obfuscation? If I become a philosopher, for what reasons could I adopt this strategy?

Answer 1

Dear philosopher,

There is an old fable that Foucault admitted to it in dialogue with a friend. However, I don’t know how true this is. I don’t know how much of this vein of thought I adopt, but one professor I work for says how he thinks the divide is a purely academic demarcation based off classist and elitist lines. Rather than being a genuine reflection of methodological or content distinctions, it instead is based largely on cultural and geographical/linguistic lines.

The more moderate position is that the Continental crowd is a bit more literary, artistic, avant-garde, etc. etc., and the Analytic ensemble is more logical and linguistic oriented.

Good luck on your future endeavors inquiring into this sort of thing. I hope this answer serves to help you in your future quandaries or quarrels!

Sincerely,

Philosopher Zach