We use essential cookies to run this site and, with your permission, privacy-friendly analytics to understand how it is used. Analytics stay switched off until you accept. Read our Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy.
Greek: apophasis (denial)
Mentioning something by saying you won't mention it
Apophasis is a rhetorical figure in which a speaker draws attention to something by ostentatiously declaring that they will not speak of it, thereby introducing the very matter they claim to set aside. The device operates through a productive contradiction: the act of announcing an omission necessarily performs its opposite, lodging the suppressed content firmly in the audience's mind. Its classical name derives from the Greek 'apophasis', meaning denial or negation, and it was catalogued by ancient rhetoricians under the broader heading of figures of thought. In Latin rhetorical tradition it appears under the name 'praeteritio' or 'occultatio', denoting the feigning of a passing-over. Cicero and Quintilian both noted its power to introduce damaging or inflammatory material while allowing the speaker a veneer of restraint or even magnanimity.
The psychological mechanism is one of forced attention: the brain cannot meaningfully process the instruction 'do not think of this thing' without first constructing a representation of that thing, so the disclaimer and the revelation become inseparable. There is also a social dynamic at work, whereby the speaker appears to be exercising discretion or generosity, which can lower the audience's critical guard precisely at the moment the most tendentious claim is being made. The device thus smuggles a charge past the listener's defences under cover of a display of restraint.
In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, Mark Antony repeatedly insists he has 'not come to praise Caesar' and that he will not 'wrong' the honourable Brutus and his associates, while doing precisely that with every successive sentence — each disclaimer deepening the crowd's sympathy for Caesar and their hostility towards the conspirators.
During a political campaign speech, a candidate might say 'I am not going to stand here and talk about my opponent's financial scandals — that is not the kind of campaign I intend to run', thereby ensuring that every person in the audience thinks of nothing else for the next several minutes.
Cicero employs the device in his second oration against Verres, announcing that he will pass over the defendant's early crimes and confine himself to the Sicilian governorship — a declaration that nevertheless compresses the earlier offences into a single, vivid, accusatory gesture before appearing to move on.
Identify material that is highly damaging, emotionally charged, or potentially improper to raise directly, and construct a brief, seemingly scrupulous announcement that you are choosing not to raise it. The declaration should be specific enough that the content is clearly understood but worded so that the speaker can maintain the posture of having exercised restraint. Keep the disavowal short: extended qualification dilutes the effect and begins to look like the manipulation it is, thereby undermining the illusion of magnanimity. Use the device sparingly, since a speaker who deploys it repeatedly loses all credibility of self-restraint.
Listen for phrases such as 'I will not mention', 'this is not the place to discuss', 'I say nothing of', or 'I could point out, but will not'. Once you hear such a construction, treat what follows the disavowal as a positive claim that the speaker is making and evaluate it on its merits, rather than being disarmed by the apparent show of generosity. Ask yourself whether the 'omission' has in fact communicated its content more effectively than a direct assertion would have done.
When abused, apophasis is a form of rhetorical dishonesty: it allows a speaker to make accusations or introduce prejudicial material while simultaneously denying responsibility for doing so, giving them a ready escape route if challenged. It is particularly dangerous in legal, political, or judicial contexts, where introducing an unsubstantiated allegation through a disclaimer can be as corrosive to a reputation as a direct charge, yet harder to rebut. A speaker of integrity should ask whether the content they are 'not mentioning' could survive scrutiny if stated plainly and directly, and if it could not, they ought to suppress it in fact rather than in pretence.
Political rhetoric, subtle criticism, ironic communication