#995 - Lionel Page - Born to Lie: How Humans Deceive Ourselves & Others
In this Modern Wisdom episode, evolutionary economist Lionel Page and host Chris Williamson examine why humans developed reasoning abilities and how we use them. Page presents evidence that human reasoning evolved primarily as a social tool for persuasion and relationship management, rather than for solving practical problems. He explains how this connects to the social brain hypothesis, which suggests our intelligence developed mainly to handle complex social interactions.
The conversation explores the role of self-deception in human behavior, building on biologist Robert Trivers's work about believing our own narratives to better convince others. Page and Williamson discuss how humans navigate social groups through various communication strategies, from using ambiguous language to foster group identity, to engaging in ideological debates that often serve as signals of coalition allegiance rather than genuine searches for truth.
This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Sep 18, 2025 episode of the Modern Wisdom
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
1-Page Summary
Psychology and Evolution of Human Reasoning and Communication
In a fascinating discussion between Lionel Page and Chris Williamson, they explore how human reasoning and communication evolved primarily as social tools rather than for individual problem-solving.
Page argues that reason developed mainly for persuasion and social navigation, not objective problem-solving. He explains that our daily use of reasoning is more often aimed at convincing others or managing relationships than solving practical problems. This connects to what scientists call the social brain hypothesis: our intelligence evolved primarily to handle complex social interactions.
Role of Self-Deception and Strategic Thinking
According to Page, self-deception serves as a powerful tool for persuasion, building on biologist Robert Trivers's idea that believing our own narratives makes us more convincing to others. Humans typically hold overly positive views of themselves, believing they're smarter, more attractive, and nicer than average. This self-deception, Page suggests, isn't just about feeling good—it's an evolutionary adaptation that helps us persuade others more effectively.
The Dynamics of Coalition-Building and Reputation
Williamson and Page emphasize humans' fundamental need to belong to social groups. Page explains that the threat of losing group membership causes significant stress, highlighting our deep social nature. The complexity of human social networks, as seen in platforms like Facebook or workplace environments, has driven our cognitive evolution.
Within these social structures, Page describes how humans employ various strategies to navigate group dynamics, from visible signals of loyalty (like wearing team logos) to complex negotiation over fairness principles. He notes that while coalitions provide safety and opportunities for cooperation, they also serve as platforms for competition.
Cooperative vs. Adversarial Communication
The discussion explores two primary communication styles. In cooperative communication, Page and Williamson describe how symbolic displays and ambiguous language help foster group identity and loyalty. However, they note that adversarial communication emerges when incentives misalign. Williamson observes that ideological debates often serve as proxies for deeper factional conflicts, while Page adds that in today's polarized climate, debates function more as signals of coalition allegiance than searches for truth.
1-Page Summary
Additional Materials
Clarifications
- The social brain hypothesis suggests that human intelligence evolved primarily to navigate complex social interactions. It posits that reasoning and communication skills developed for social purposes like persuasion and relationship management rather than solely for individual problem-solving. This theory highlights the importance of social connections and group dynamics in shaping human cognitive evolution.
- Robert Trivers's idea on self-deception posits that individuals can deceive themselves to enhance their ability to deceive others, thereby increasing their persuasive power. This concept suggests that believing in one's own falsehoods can make one more convincing to others, contributing to social success and influence. Self-deception is seen as an evolutionary adaptation that aids in navigating complex social interactions by bolstering one's credibility and persuasive skills. Trivers's theory highlights the intricate ways in which human psychology and social dynamics intertwine to shape behavior and communication strategies.
- Coalition-building involves forming alliances or groups to achieve common goals or address shared interests. Humans engage in coalition-building to enhance social connections, safety, and cooperation within their social networks. Strategies like displaying loyalty signals and negotiating fairness principles are used to navigate group dynamics within coalitions. While coalitions offer benefits like cooperation and support, they can also lead to competition and conflicts within and between groups.
- Factional conflicts typically involve disputes or disagreements between different groups or factions within a larger organization or society. These conflicts can arise due to differing interests, beliefs, or goals among the factions. Factional conflicts often lead to competition, power struggles, and sometimes even open confrontations between the opposing groups. Resolving factional conflicts may require negotiation, compromise, or the establishment of new alliances to achieve stability or progress.
- In the context of debates, a polarized climate refers to an environment where opinions and beliefs are sharply divided into opposing camps with little middle ground. This polarization often leads to intense disagreements, lack of compromise, and a focus on defending one's own group or ideology rather than seeking common ground or objective truth. In such climates, discussions can become more about asserting loyalty to a particular group or viewpoint rather than engaging in constructive dialogue or problem-solving. This dynamic can hinder productive communication and collaboration, as individuals may prioritize aligning with their group over open-minded discussion.
Counterarguments
- While reasoning may have evolved for social purposes, it also likely developed to solve environmental challenges, suggesting a dual purpose rather than a solely social one.
- Some cognitive scientists argue that the development of human intelligence was also driven by the need to understand and manipulate the physical environment, not just social interactions.
- The effectiveness of self-deception in persuasion can be context-dependent, and in some cases, being transparent and honest may be more persuasive.
- Overconfidence as a result of self-deception can lead to poor decision-making and negative social consequences, which challenges its characterization as an adaptive trait.
- The idea that humans always hold overly positive views of themselves is contradicted by the prevalence of mental health issues like depression and low self-esteem, where individuals may have excessively negative views of themselves.
- The stress from losing group membership may not always be significant for all individuals, as some people thrive in more solitary or individualistic environments.
- The role of individual agency and the ability to form new social connections can mitigate the impact of losing group membership, suggesting a more nuanced view of human social needs.
- While human social networks have undoubtedly influenced cognitive evolution, other factors like tool use, ecological challenges, and language development have also played critical roles.
- The use of visible signals of loyalty can be more complex than simply navigating group dynamics, as they can also be used for personal branding or self-expression.
- The assertion that coalitions are platforms for competition might overlook the collaborative and altruistic aspects that can arise within groups.
- Cooperative communication is not always beneficial for group identity and loyalty; it can sometimes mask underlying issues or suppress individual expression.
- Adversarial communication can be constructive, fostering critical thinking and innovation, rather than merely reflecting misaligned incentives.
- Ideological debates can be genuine attempts to reach truth and consensus, rather than just proxies for factional conflicts.
- Debates in polarized climates can sometimes lead to greater understanding and bridge-building, rather than merely signaling coalition allegiance.
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Psychology and Evolution of Human Reasoning and Communication
Lionel Page and Chris Williamson discuss the social underpinnings of human reasoning and communication, exploring how these cognitive processes evolved less for individual problem-solving and more as tools for social interaction.
Reason Persuades and Convinces, Not Just Solves Problems
Reason Evolved For Social Advantage, Not Objective Problem-Solving
Lionel Page argues that reason is frequently misconceived as a mechanism for solving objective problems. However, he indicates that reason's evolutionary purpose is primarily social—serving to persuade and convince others rather than directly resolving issues. Page suggests that human reasoning has more to do with negotiation and persuasion in daily social interactions than with rigorous objective problem-solving.
Daily Reasoning: Negotiating Relationships, Influencing Beliefs
Communication is a complex, evolved skill crucial to human interaction, evidenced by decades of computer programming required to simulate conversation. This complexity is inherent in exchanges that influence beliefs and provide novel information. Page points out that communication often relies on understanding unspoken messages and anticipating interpretations, which reinforces the idea that reasoning developed chiefly for social navigation. He also delves into the social brain hypothesis, proposing that our intelligence primarily evolved to manage complex social interactions. Daily reasoning, according to Page, is used to persuade friends or bosses more than it is to solve practical problems.
Reason and Self-Deception as Social Manipulation Tools
Self-Deception Convinces Others by Our Belief
Chris Williamson broaches the subject of self-deception, which Lionel Page explains as a tool for persuasion. It involves people believing their version of a story that casts them positively, often ignoring or downplaying unfavorable points. Self-deception, then, becomes a strategic act where people might ignore the truth if it ser ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Psychology and Evolution of Human Reasoning and Communication
Additional Materials
Clarifications
- Self-deception can be a tool for social manipulation as individuals may deceive themselves to present a more favorable image to others, influencing how they are perceived. By believing their own distorted version of reality, individuals can strategically shape interactions and relationships to their advantage. This manipulation through self-deception can help individuals persuade others, control narratives, and enhance their social standing by presenting themselves in a more positive light. Ultimately, self-deception can serve as a mechanism for managing social dynamics and achieving desired outcomes in interpersonal interactions.
- Self-deception in social scenarios can offer strategic benefits by influencing how others perceive us. By presenting a version o ...
Counterarguments
- Reason also evolved for individual problem-solving, as evidenced by our ability to engage in abstract thought and solve complex problems that do not have immediate social implications.
- While reason is used to persuade and convince, it also plays a critical role in scientific discovery and technological innovation, which often require objective problem-solving.
- Communication may be complex and evolved for social interaction, but it also serves to transmit knowledge and cultural practices, which can be independent of immediate social advantages.
- Reasoning for social navigation does not preclude its use in solitary contexts, such as planning, reflection, and understanding the natural world.
- Daily reasoning can be equally important for solving practical problems, such as those related to survival, work, or personal projects, which may not involve social interaction.
- Self-deception might not always be strategic; it can also result from cognitive biases and errors in judgment that do not confer social advan ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Role of Self-Deception and Strategic Thinking in Behavior
Lionel Page and Chris Williamson explore the concept of self-deception as a strategic element in human behavior and its implications for personal psychology and social interactions.
Self-Deception Is a Common Aspect of Human Psychology
Self-deception is a common and innate aspect of human psychology. Page explains that biologist Robert Trivers originally put forward the idea that self-deception is a strategy that works effectively to convince others. He suggests that humans have a propensity to hold overly positive views of their abilities, traits, and standing, often believing they are smarter, more attractive, and nicer than they actually are. This inclination leads a large percentage of people to think they are better at certain skills, like driving, than the average person.
Humans Hold Overly Positive Views of Their Abilities, Traits, and Standing
Page delves into why evolutionary processes may have favored an overconfident mindset despite the real risks associated with being unprepared for certain situations. He posits that overconfidence could have evolutionary benefits because it helps individuals persuade each other, thus reducing the risk linked to outright lying.
Self-Deception as an Evolutionary Adaptation For Persuasion
Building upon Trivers's ideas, Page highlights that believing one's own narratives might offer an evolutionary advantage by being more convincing to others, pointing out that a sincere belief does not exhibit cues of dishonesty, similar to a poker player who maintains a straight face.
Self-Presentation and Impression Management in Social Interaction
In social contexts, self-deception aids in self-presentation and impression management. Page points out that we all self-deceive as part of our design, viewing the world through rose-tinted glasses. This cognitive bias is illustrated by couples who, when estimating the percentage of household chores they do, often report a combined percentage that exceeds 100%.
Indirect Communication Allows "Plausible Deniability" and Narrative Control
The hosts discuss the strategic advantage of self-deception in social interactions through plausible deniability, where indirect communication allows individuals to manipulate information to support a conclusion without appearing dishonest. An example from "When Harry M ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Role of Self-Deception and Strategic Thinking in Behavior
Additional Materials
Clarifications
- Self-deception as a strategic element in human behavior involves individuals unknowingly misleading themselves to gain advantages in social interactions or personal beliefs. It suggests that by believing their own narratives, individuals can appear more convincing to others, even if the beliefs are not entirely accurate. This strategic self-deception can serve as a tool for persuasion and impression management in various social contexts. It highlights the complex interplay between personal psychology, social dynamics, and evolutionary advantages in shaping human behavior.
- Self-deception as a strategy to convince others suggests that when individuals genuinely believe in their own narratives, they can present themselves more convincingly, without exhibiting cues of dishonesty. This sincere belief in their self-serving claims can make their communication more persuasive and effective in influencing others. By being unaware of their own deception, individuals may come across as more authentic and trustworthy, enhancing their ability to persuade and manipulate social interactions. This concept highlights the complex interplay between self-deception, belief in one's narratives, and the strategic advantage it can offer in social dynamics.
- Evolutionary processes may have favored an overconfident mindset because overconfidence can help individuals persuade others effectively, reducing the risks associated with outright lying. This trait could have provided an advantage in social interactions and mating opportunities, leading to greater reproductive success for individuals displaying overconfidence. In ancestral environments, individuals who projected confidence may have been perceived as more capable and desirable mates, increasing their chances of passing on their genes. Therefore, overconfidence could have been selected for over generations due to its potential benefits in survival and reproduction.
- Plausible deniability in social interactions involves using indirect communication to maintain ambiguity, allowing individuals to manipulate information without being held accountable for the actual message conveyed. It provides a way to present information that supports a particular conclusion while avoiding direct responsibility or appearing dishonest. This strategy allows individuals to control the narrative without explicitly committing to a specific statement or action. Plausible deniability can be seen as a form of protection against repercussions or consequences by creating a buffer between the person and the information being communicated.
- Indirect communication and narrative control involve using ambiguous language or actions to influence perceptions without explicitly stating something. This strategy allows individuals to sha ...
Counterarguments
- While self-deception may be common, not all individuals hold overly positive views of themselves; some may have a more realistic or even pessimistic view of their abilities and traits.
- The idea that self-deception is an evolutionary adaptation for persuasion is a theory that may not account for all aspects of human behavior and could be complemented by other theories that emphasize the role of conscious self-awareness and honesty.
- Self-deception might aid in self-presentation and impression management, but it can also lead to personal and interpersonal problems when the truth is inevitably revealed or when individuals fail to correct their misconceptions.
- Indirect communication and "plausible deniability" can sometimes lead to misunderstandings and a lack of clear communication, which can be detrimental to building trust and maintaining healthy relationships.
- Sincerely believing in self-serving claims can sometimes lead to ethical issues or a lack of accountability, as it may prevent individuals from critically examining their actions and their impact on others.
- Choosing a comfortable reality through self-deception may provide short-term comfort but can lead to long-term detriments in personal growth and the ability to deal with life's challenges effectively.
- Recognizing self-decep ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
The Dynamics of Coalition-Building, Reputation, and Social Positioning
Chris Williamson and Lionel Page illuminate the complex social behaviors of humans, emphasizing the importance of coalition-building, reputation management, and social positioning in interactions.
Humans Are Driven to Belong To Groups
Human beings fundamentally need to belong to social groups, as Williamson points out, suggesting a deep-rooted urgency to form coalitions and social connections. Page talks about the fundamental and enduring need for belonging, which gives people confidence, security, and a safety net for the future. He points out that the threat of losing group membership induces significant stress, demonstrating the depth of our social inclinations.
Social Networks Drive Cognitive Evolution
The complexity of human social networks, such as those represented on Facebook or within workplaces, has likely stimulated our cognitive evolution, according to Pagel. Especially, the need to effectively navigate and manage reputations within those networks has exerted significant evolutionary pressure, as Williamson mentions.
Reputation in Social Coalitions Is a Key Psychological Priority
Reputation is maintained as a record that others can refer to when determining an individual's cooperativeness. Whether for women maintaining tight-knit networks or for individuals navigating the complex matrix of social coalitions, managing reputation ensures compliance with rules of cooperation.
Cooperation and Competition Are Interwoven in Human Interaction
The interplay between cooperation and competition underlies much of human interaction. Social rules play a fundamental role in sustaining cooperation, as Page explains.
Social Rules Sustain Cooperation
Page emphasizes that rules and conventions, such as driving on the correct side of the road, facilitate cooperative behavior. He describes the cooperative nature of ancestral alloparenting among women, underlining the importance of cooperation in human history.
Humans Use Strategies For Advantages in Social Groups
Humans employ various strategies to navigate and potentially gain advantages in social groups. Page discusses the game theory problem of trust, where individuals must show signs of commitment to foster effective group cooperation. Political systems reflect this dynamic; different political systems exemplify the interplay of loyalty, reputation, and coalition-building, from the Politburo's cutthroat coalition games to the broader considerations in modern democracies.
Visible signals of loyalty, such as wearing team logos or singing the team song, signal trustworthiness within a group. Emotions in romantic and social relationships, expressed through commitment signals, help to build reputation and trustworthiness within coalitions.
Page also touches on the role of negotiation over fairness principles, signaling commitment, and utilizing strategies for bargaining within groups. These strategies aid humans in maintaining a balance between seeking independence and cultivating social connections. Even in cooperative teams, conflicts exist as people have divergent desires and needs. Coalitions provide safety, opportunities for cooperation, and platforms for competitions, such as the case in the game ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
The Dynamics of Coalition-Building, Reputation, and Social Positioning
Additional Materials
Clarifications
- Ancestral alloparenting among women is a practice where women other than the biological mother help care for and raise children within a social group. This cooperative childcare strategy allowed women to share the responsibilities of nurturing and protecting offspring, contributing to the survival and well-being of the community. It fostered social bonds, support networks, and cooperation among women in early human societies. Ancestral alloparenting played a crucial role in shaping human social structures and behaviors, emphasizing the significance of collective caregiving in evolutionary contexts.
- The "messy middle zone" concept describes the delicate balance individuals face between their desire for autonomy and their need to maintain social connections. It represents the complex interplay of cooperation and competition in human interactions, where individua ...
Counterarguments
- While humans have a fundamental need to belong, some individuals may prioritize personal autonomy and self-reliance over group membership.
- The benefits of belonging to a group can sometimes be outweighed by the costs, such as the pressure to conform or the loss of individual identity.
- The stress induced by the threat of losing group membership may vary greatly among individuals, with some being more resilient or indifferent to exclusion.
- The assertion that social networks have stimulated cognitive evolution is difficult to prove conclusively, and other factors may also have played significant roles.
- Reputation management may not always ensure compliance with rules of cooperation; in some cases, individuals may prioritize personal gain over reputation.
- The interplay between cooperation and competition can be more complex, with some cultures emphasizing one over the other to a greater extent.
- The importance of rules and conventions in facilitating cooperation can be overstated, as informal norms and personal relationships often play a critical role.
- The strategies employed by humans in social groups may not always be conscious or deliberate, and sometimes instinctual or emotional responses can be more influential.
- The effectiveness of visible signals of loyalty as indicators of trustworthiness can be questioned, as such signals can be easily manipulated or faked.
- The role of emotions in building trustworthiness within coalitions can be double-edged, as emotions can also lead to bias and irrational decision-making.
- The principle of fairness is subjective and can be interpreted differently across cultures and individuals, challenging the idea that it universally ensures cooperation.
- The impact of varying relationship statuses on cooperative behavior is complex and can be influenced by numerous external factors, making it difficult to generalize.
- The motivation to strategically position oneself for reputation and resource gains within a group may not always be driven by status and hi ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
The Contrast Between Cooperative and Adversarial Communication Styles
In a discussion about communication, experts address the differences between cooperative and adversarial styles, the former fostering understanding and group loyalty, and the latter emerging from misaligned incentives and deeper conflicts.
Cooperative Communication: Understanding, Loyalty, Group Commitment
Cooperative communication is characterized by ambiguous language and symbolic displays that enhance group identity and adhere to social norms.
Symbolic Displays and Ambiguous Language Foster Identity
Lionel Page and Chris Williamson discuss how symbolic elements like logos, t-shirts, and songs create a strong sense of belonging among group members. Engaging in such displays signals loyalty and reinforces group identity. This ambiguity in communication serves as a foothold for plausible deniability, particularly in sensitive situations.
Reputation and Fear Motivate Conformity to Group Norms
Experts suggest that the fear of being perceived as disloyal drives individuals to conform to group norms. Social interactions and communications, although ideally efficient and cooperative, often involve considerations of reputation. Individuals are concerned about showing signs of loyalty due to fear of losing their standing within the group.
Adversarial Communication Arises From Misaligned or Conflicting Social Incentives
Adversarial communication occurs when individuals have conflicting interests or when there is competition within social interactions.
People May Conceal Motives to Gain Advantages Over Rivals
Williamson and Page touch upon the use of self-deception and strategic ambiguity as tools for rationalizing behaviors that may bend rules to gain an advantage. In adversarial contexts, individuals may conceal their true motives to win an advantageous position over their rivals.
Ideological Debates Are Proxies for Deeper Faction Conflicts
Debates suggest that ideological confrontations can often serve as a cover for deeper, more personal factional confl ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
The Contrast Between Cooperative and Adversarial Communication Styles
Additional Materials
Clarifications
- Symbolic displays, such as logos, t-shirts, and songs, play a crucial role in fostering a sense of belonging and group identity among members. These symbols serve as visual and auditory cues that reinforce loyalty and connection within the group. By engaging in these symbolic displays, individuals signal their affiliation and commitment to the shared values and norms of the group. Ambiguity in communication through these symbols allows for a sense of unity while providing a degree of flexibility and deniability in expressing group identity.
- Ambiguity in communication for plausible deniability means using language or symbols that can be interpreted in more than one way, allowing individuals to deny a specific meaning if needed. This ambiguity provides a buffer against direct accusations or consequences by creating room for interpretation. It can be a strategic tool in sensitive situations where clarity might lead to unwanted outcomes or accountability. Ambiguous communication can help individuals navigate delicate or contentious issues without committing to a specific stance or action.
- In group dynamics, the fear of being seen as disloyal can lead individuals to conform to the established norms and expectations of the group. This fear stems from the desire to maintain a positive reputation and standing within the group, as being perceived as disloyal can result in social repercussions. Conforming to group norms is a way for individuals to signal their loyalty and commitment, which helps them maintain their social connections and avoid potential isolation or exclusion. This dynamic highlights the importance of social acceptance and the role it plays in shaping individual behavior within a group setting.
- In adversarial communication, strategic ambiguity involves intentionally using vague or unclear language to manipulate perceptions or gain an advantage over rivals. Self-deception in this context means individuals may convince themselves of false beliefs or justifications to support their actions, even if ...
Counterarguments
- Symbolic displays can also be divisive, creating in-groups and out-groups, which may lead to exclusion or discrimination against those not part of the group.
- Ambiguous language might lead to misunderstandings and inefficiencies in communication, potentially hindering progress and problem-solving.
- Conformity to group norms can suppress individuality and discourage critical thinking or innovation.
- Adversarial communication can sometimes lead to clearer boundaries and more straightforward negotiations, as parties are compelled to articulate their positions more precisely.
- Concealing motives might be a defensive strategy not just to gain advantage but also to protect oneself or one's group from exploitation or harm.
- Ideological debates can be genuine attempts to reconcile differing views and may lead to a deeper understanding of complex issues.
- Criticisms of public figures could be based on legitimate concerns or constructive feedback rather than ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Create Summaries for anything on the web
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser
