The traditional normative of the neutral style did not prove itself to be the only appropriate critical approach to the obscure style widespread in continental theories. Against the thesis about the self-reference of the text (by which some of the poststructuralists tend to defend the obscure style) the author argues, that it is not “the text self-irony”, but rather “the author’s illusion about his/her importance”, that is responsible for the dynamics of the style. The instantiation of this illusion is a “dogmatic style”. The latter is characterized by an apparent identification of the author with the written text. In conclusion the author tries to answers the following questions: Does “the dogmatism of writing” apply to all philosophical writing, or even to all literary writing? Is the self-irony or self-reflection of philosophy effective as a tool against such an expanding of dogmatism on the philosophy as a whole?