Obfuscation Fallacy

by Craig Shrives

What Is Obfuscation Fallacy?

The Power of Obfuscation: Harnessing Influence through Disguise

In an era dominated by information and constant connectivity, the ability to influence has become a highly sought-after commodity. While transparency and authenticity are valued traits, there are instances where intentional obfuscation can be wielded as a powerful tool to shape narratives and manipulate opinions.

Obfuscation refers to the deliberate act of creating confusion, ambiguity, or concealment to obscure the true nature of something. It involves the strategic manipulation of information, language, or visual cues, leading to an altered perception or understanding of a situation. Obfuscation can take many forms, such as cryptic messaging, misleading visuals, complex jargon, or intentionally convoluted explanations.

One of the primary ways obfuscation can be used for influence is through misdirection. By diverting attention away from critical aspects or redirecting focus towards less relevant details, influential actors can control the narrative and shape public opinion. This tactic is commonly employed in politics, advertising, and public relations to steer conversations, highlight specific agendas, or conceal inconvenient truths.

Obfuscation can also exploit inherent cognitive biases, influencing individuals' decision-making processes. Cognitive biases are systematic errors in thinking that humans tend to exhibit, and they can be manipulated through obfuscation techniques. By triggering cognitive biases like confirmation bias, availability bias, or anchoring bias, skilled influencers can sway opinions and solidify preconceived notions without directly presenting factual evidence.

Advancements in technology have further expanded the potential of obfuscation as a tool for influence. Algorithmic obfuscation, for instance, involves the manipulation of search results, social media algorithms, or recommendation systems to control the information users are exposed to. By tailoring content to fit specific narratives or biases, technology platforms can subtly mould opinions and reinforce certain world views.

Obfuscation, when employed strategically, can be a powerful tool for influence in various spheres. Whether it is politics, marketing, or technology, the ability to shape narratives and direct attention lies in the hands of those who master the art of obfuscation. However, with power comes responsibility, and it is incumbent upon influencers and the general public to uphold ethical standards, promote transparency, and foster critical thinking to counteract the potential pitfalls of obfuscation.

An Example of Obfuscation Fallacy

Black and white swans?

Here is an example of deliberate obfuscation: It allows you to say "you're wrong" but leaves your victim thinking you said "you're right".

Deliberately clouding the message to help press home a point or to avoid answering a difficult question means you are committing the obfuscation fallacy. But, falling for the argument due to a clouding of the facts means you're guilty of committing the fallacy too.

Obfuscation is not, in itself, a logical fallacy. It can only be described as a fallacy if it forms part of an argument. Here's an example. Firstly, without the obfuscation:

Lee: "Swans can be black or white. Jack is a swan. Therefore, Jack is white."
Mark: "I disagree. Jack could be black."

Here is the same argument with obfuscation:

Lee: "Whilst the pigment particles embedded in some swans' plumage will reflect the vast majority of electromagnetic radiation from ~700 nanometers to ~400 nanometers, the plumage and structures in others' feathers will absorb a high proportion of the wavelengths perceivable as white light. Jack is a swan. Therefore, Jack is white."

Mark: "Yeah, whatever. Sounds like you know your onions."

A Practical Application for Obfuscation Fallacy

Attack with obfuscation

If it suits you, obfuscate like crazy if it's the only way to negotiate an obstacle impeding your progress. The best and easiest way to obfuscate is to present lots pages of detailed work on a subject that isn't the decision-maker's top priority. He won't read it. This significantly improves your chances of the decision-maker being governed by his status quo bias (and allowing the current situation to continue unchanged) because that's the easiest thing for him to do, and he'll think it's reasonably safe.

This is great news if you want the decision-maker to do nothing (e.g., not cancel your contract). However, if the status quo being maintained doesn't suit you (e.g., you need him to write you a new contract), then you would do well to notify the decision-maker of the dangers of continuing without you before obfuscating about what you bring to the party. It's an underhanded strategy, but if the benefits you bring are not that strong, you might want to think about it.

Another Practical Application for Obfuscation Fallacy

Defend against obfuscation

If you have an important decision to make based on a long document that you don't understand or haven't got time to read, tell the author to get it all on one page. Not two pages. One.

Critical Thinking Test

Are you good at spotting the biases, fallacies, and other cognitive effects? Can you spot when statistics have been manipulated? Can you read body language? Well, let's see! Show Instructions

See Also