« Assorted links | Main | Leningrad during the Nazi siege »
*The Invention of Lying*
I didn't think it was possible to make a movie this Hansonian and no they never waver. The basic premise is "a comedy set in a world where no one has ever lied." People speak the truth to each other in unbiased fashion and every channel on TV is some version of The History Channel. You then see, step by step, why this is not a Nash equilibrium and you observe, as the title indicates, "the invention of lying," including under conditions of altruism. Along the way, you see a theory of the origins of religion, a portrait of how the world would look if no one signaled, a redo of Geoffrey Miller on The Mating Mind, and hints at the idea of ESS. It's a "remarkably radical comedy" (Ebert) and the gushy parts have hidden venom.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on October 4, 2009 at 06:26 PM in Film | Permalink
Comments
You see the problem with this idea is that everyone would have to be infinitely gullible for the inventor of lies to have a real impact. I don't really know the premise of the movie, but in one scene he says "this building is going to explode if you don't sleep with me." Well, the woman could just say, "I believe that he is telling me the truth, i.e. he believes this to be the case. But he is mistaken. This building will not explode." He is not malicious, just wrong.
Don't waste your money. Go see Zombieland instead.
Posted by: Carl at Oct 4, 2009 6:56:36 PM
Carl,
You are on the internet... use it to know the premise. And if no one could lie, then it is not being gullible to believe what you hear or see. In that kind of world, gullibility would not exist.
Anyway, Ricky Gervais is a genius.
Don't listen to Carl.
Posted by: R. Pointer at Oct 4, 2009 7:16:43 PM
A friend of mine liked it, but then he also recommended "Rachel Getting Married," the worst movie I ever saw by far. The trailer (viewable online) didn't impress me. I'm waiting for another "The Lives of Others."
And while were on the topic of Hollywood, free Roman Polanski already! Yes, a lot of his defenders are moral retrogrades, but he settled the civil suit, the victim forgave him, and criminal law is an antilibertarian ass.
Posted by: AADL at Oct 4, 2009 7:38:27 PM
The presence of lying is compatible with our evolutionary tendency toward relatively thin skin. In the absence of lying, natural selection would favor those who don't care at all about what anyone else thinks. Perhaps the subsequent lack of shame would lead to antisocial behavior and general unrest.
Posted by: adina at Oct 4, 2009 7:49:33 PM
I wish to cite a Youtube comment:
"Worst movie this year without a doubt. Utterly terrible, MAYBE If you're 10 and you still laugh at the word poo you'd find this funny but otherwise It's appaling. Sure there's the odd cheap laugh but It's just a horrificly bad story and even worse acting, oh, and Ricky's love Interest Is a total bitch."
The Invention of Citing Youtube Comments.
Posted by: IWantCookieNow at Oct 4, 2009 7:59:19 PM
No, no, no. Only Rethugs lie. Obama and the democrats can only tell the truth (Like I will not raise INCOME taxes on those that make less than $250k).
CAPS = implied
Posted by: Jay at Oct 4, 2009 8:32:25 PM
ESS = Evolutionarily Stable Strategy ?
...not an acronym I've encountered before.
Posted by: Jacob Wintersmith at Oct 4, 2009 8:38:17 PM
"ESS = Evolutionarily Stable Strategy ?
...not an acronym I've encountered before."
FYI, though, this is a pretty standard 1st semester game theory acronyn, so Tyler is not using a 50 cent acronym here.
Posted by: liberalarts at Oct 4, 2009 8:54:21 PM
I loved Gervais' standup routine, so I'm considering this movie. Carl pointed out one flaw: people in the movie (from the trailer I saw) seem to attribute not only honesty, but also omniscience, to each other. Like, the bank teller hands him money assuming their computer made a mistake, when Gervais' character could have simply been mistaken about how much money he had left in his account.
Another thing: Are they really modeling how different the world would be, in the (initial) absence of lying? E.g. I sure hope there are no safes in that bank. (Even if people could steal, they would have to admit they were the robbers if asked.) I'm assuming the writers put in a few differences, but I bet they missed a bunch.
Posted by: Bob Murphy at Oct 4, 2009 9:12:24 PM
Carl, I suspect in a world where no one lies, that in order to make a statement people will volunteer the presence of uncertainty, otherwise it would be a lie of omission, which violates the assumptions.
Posted by: LoneSnark at Oct 4, 2009 9:20:12 PM
so, can the internet sell hanson to hollywood as a highly paid scriptwriter and use the proceeds for population control?
Posted by: babar at Oct 4, 2009 10:18:33 PM
"You can only talk rubbish if you're aware of knowledge."
-Karl Pilkington
Posted by: Washington Irving at Oct 4, 2009 11:25:43 PM
You're almost certainly better off reading James Morrow's City of Truth, where the government conditions everyone to tell the truth, and a heartbroken father has to learn to lie to his son who develops terminal cancer. Initially very, very funny.
Posted by: Dylan at Oct 5, 2009 12:37:53 AM
>> The presence of lying is compatible with our evolutionary tendency toward relatively thin skin. In the absence of lying, natural selection would favor those who don't care at all about what anyone else thinks. Perhaps the subsequent lack of shame would lead to antisocial behavior and general unrest.
That's an interesting thought.
I think it wouldn't be natural selection, genetics work slowly compared to another factor - people will just get mentally accustomed to having to deal with blunt statements, much like the way it is in professional sports and other high-performance pursuits.
We could also adapt by reducing contact with each other, minimizing the negative social impact.
We could even use the absence of lying to improve collaboration, getting the best thinkers and ideas to the forefront, using those to further improve our lives, including collaboration, thereby inducing a beneficial cycle.
In short, there are a variety of outcomes, thanks to the fact that we're a very pliable species.
Posted by: vanity-name at Oct 5, 2009 1:50:14 AM
There's a book, The Truth Machine, by James Halperin, where a perfect lie detector is invented. It's a bit flat, but the idea is interesting. *That* would make a good premise for a movie.
Posted by: MichaelG at Oct 5, 2009 2:40:49 AM
The real trick in such a universe is being able to do any math or science. If this subject were broached, that might make the movie interesting and even thought provoking.
Posted by: mulp at Oct 5, 2009 3:47:49 AM
In a world without lies, the thinner skinned would learn to be more subtle when they want affirmation rather than truth. I would expect new cues to arise signaling that someone is interested in feedback about a topic but afraid to ask a direct question.
Posted by: Telnar at Oct 5, 2009 8:07:25 AM
One man's lie is another man's uncertainty.
Posted by: CK at Oct 5, 2009 9:11:13 AM
It sounds like the script was written by Byrne and Whiten. Looking forward to it.
Posted by: Marbury at Oct 5, 2009 9:17:26 AM
On a recent C Span Books program, I heard about
three varieties of lying in a contemporary context.
A highly skilled stealer of rare books walks
into a specialist shop and on being asked by
the suspicious manager if he wishes to buy
anything replies that he is just looking around.
Later he asks if they have any Nathaniel
Hawthorne and gets the reply that they don't,
which the stealer, a convicted criminal, knows to
be a lie.
Libraries which receive gifts of rare books are
loathe to admit that they have lost any books,
because the gifts would then dry up. A new
librarian, looked high and low for a
book which was supposed to be there, and not
finding it, reported to the head librarian that
the book was missing, who informed him, "We don't
have any missing books" (the double meaning being
a way of acknowledging the truth without telling
it).
Posted by: Candadai Tirumalai at Oct 5, 2009 9:21:30 AM
Fun post. The movie's world without lying led me to wonder if there could be a world without truth-telling. There's probably a clear evolutionary reason why that can't be. But is truth-telling something that could vary by culture?
Posted by: EI at Oct 5, 2009 10:21:49 AM
According to Karl P. the original inventor of lying's brain was an alien from another planet...
Posted by: Rich at Oct 5, 2009 10:58:34 AM
LoneSnark, many human languages build the signaling of certainty into the grammar. The Spanish subjunctive is one example; it indicates that the speaker has some doubt or uncertainty about whether the action will occur, or has occurred. Japanese has a lot of phrases that are used for the same purpose - English has such phrases, of course, but their use is nearly mandatory in Japanese. There are also languages where the grammar indicates the source of the speaker's knowledge, that is, a verb or noun is inflected differently if the speaker directly observed the action, versus if they were told of it by another, versus if they are speculating about something.
I also second Dylan's recommendation of Morrow's "City of Truth."
Posted by: Ken at Oct 6, 2009 10:25:00 AM
Great movie. Had not heard they crack jokes about an invisible man in the sky. I was not the only one laughing out loud.
Posted by: DCNative at Oct 12, 2009 11:38:12 AM
