A Hermeneutic of Suspicion: What It Is and, Why You Should Be Suspicious if You’re Not Already…

What Even is a “Hermeneutic,” Let Alone a Hermeneutic of Suspicion”…?

Part of having gone through and coming out of this “rabbit hole” has been the after effects we can label here today as “suspicion.” There are different types of this form of critical thought but, keeping it brief, it is largely attributed to a guy named Paul Ricœur. He labeled Marx, Freud, and Nietzsche as the “Masters of Suspicion.” 

Obviously, this form of thought is nothing new; far before Marx, Freud or Nietzsche existed this way of thinking, writing, critiquing or debating existed. As we see men such as Galileo (1564) was anathematized as “heretic” for presenting a heliocentric solar system which, undermined scripture and therefore was a direct threat to the Catholic institution.

Arguably it was a form of what we’re talking about here today: A Hermeneutic of Suspicion.

But, before we can talk about this hermeneutic of suspicion, most are probably thinking what even is a “hermeneutic”?