The social game
Most people do play the game of truth, whether they realize it or not. They have opinions, defend them at casual dinners, get heated, and argue — all signs they’re in the game. Once you step into that arena, you’re saying the only metric that matters is how true your beliefs are. No excuses, no alternative measures like “I’m just trying to fit in” or “I’m signaling virtue.” If you’re playing, you’re judged by truth, period. And you see a problem: too many people play this game without even knowing it, or they play it for the wrong reasons — social points, fitting in, looking good — rather than aiming for actual truth.
People often argue opinions that they truly belive not to seek truth but to win, belong, or signal something. Think of a dinner debate about, say, climate change; someone might push a view not because they’ve studied the data but because it aligns with their social circle or makes them seem “xyz.” They’re in the truth game but playing by social metrics, not truth metrics. They don’t even realize the game they’re in, so they’re judged as “dumb” (believing false things) by the only metric that should matter: truth.
Get Cluster’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
That’s a way to frame why people are dumb, but if we try to draw the big picture, it would be something like this. By definition, most people are average, and average people tend to play the social game, with the system and education reinforcing it, and natural biases underlying it. So they don’t chase truth; they have no incentive to do so, therefore you inevitably end up believing false things because your game is not designed to believe true things.
I think the more insidious thing is to believe that people are playing the truth game, but in real life, they play the social game. If you begin to engage with them, you end up having a conversation where you optimize for different things, and in this case, there is a high probability that there is an asymmetry of information or reasoning, and that causes genuine misunderstanding in the words used and hidden assumptions. If you do it, you will just end up in a meaningless conversation. We only can speak with independent-minded people with an obsession about truth because we can’t speak with like-minded people.
bottom line: you can’t have an argument with someone that isn’t commited to truth. if not a missmatch will exist.
