"Lying Increases Trust in Science" is the actual title of a study published in Theory and Society by Byron Hyde from the Bristol Centre for Ethics in Medicine.
Even though Hyde and media groups refer to it as a "study," it's more of a philosophical exercise, considering there weren't any experiments conducted.
The idea is based on the transparency paradox: Essentially, transparency is needed for science to be trustworthy, but the more transparent science becomes, the less the public trusts it.
(Particularly when scientists are transparent about bad things like conflicts of interest or whether the Epstein files really exist.)
It is only by being transparent with good news that transparency increases trust.
And then he comes to the thrust of the title:
Ostensibly, the best way to resolve the transparency paradox is to falsify the information about which institutions are transparent so that it's only ever good news they have to report.
He ultimately comes to the conclusion that educating the public on why science is always right is better than straight-up lying to them. But just out of curiosity, I looked up some of his other publications to see how he fares in the lie versus education department:
Here's a quick list of titles:
Surveys of the scientific community on the existence of extraterrestrial life
A Brief History of Equality
The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity
The New Age of Empire: How Racism and Colonialism Still Rule the World
Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility
The End of Animal Farming
Seems Mr. Hyde is less interested in science and much more interested in social agendas.
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
