We are left with the equally troubling observation that contemporary societies throughout the world are today being guided by lie-based narratives, reinforced by authoritarian regimes. Even progressive, democratic societies seem to be susceptible to the dangerous interplay between the lie and authority. Richardson closes her analysis by offering a somewhat more positive perspective. There might be some hope given the reassertion in some societies (such as the United States) of judicial review and political renunciation of the big lies. As Richardson notes: “I wonder if reality is starting to reassert itself.”
The Truth About Lying III: The Cultural Perspective
While the focus on the role played by lies in group and event societal setting yields important insights –and warnings—regarding the negative image of dishonest communication, we believe that our analysis should extend even further into an exploration of the basic cultural foundations of lie-based group and societal perspectives and actions. As we have suggested throughout this series of essays on the crisis of expertise, the mid-21st Century world is one that is saturated with volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA). VUCA is, in turn, swirling in a white-water world of turbulence (Vail, 2008) and strained in a world of profound contradiction (Bergquist, 2020).
Given these challenging conditions, the cost-benefit analyses that have dominated the world of expertise is no longer viable (Ariely,2012, p. 5). One might actually wonder if this mechanistic analysis was ever viable (Sun and Bergquist, 2021). This VUCA Plus saturated environment has created a culture of confusion and anxiety. It is not amenable to simple (let alone compelling) statements of truth. Misinformation can easily prevail. The Hatfills of mid-21st Century life can easily find a platform for their ignorant observations and recommendations.
While there are many reasons why the VUCAS Plus environment is now prevalent and why a culture arising from this set of environmental challenges might be based in confusion and anxiety, we want to identify several of the principal reasons. We do this by turning to a distinction that has been drawn several times by one of (Bergquist and Brock, 2008; Bergquist and Pawlak, 2008). between six cultures that operate in most contemporary organizations (and more broadly in most societies). Four of these cultures have existed for many years. They are the professional culture, the managerial culture, the advocacy culture and the alternative culture. Each of these cultures holds a preference for specific kinds and sources of information and expertise. Furthermore, each is vulnerable to certain types and sources of misinformation.
As the name implies, the professional culture is associated with the many professions that now populate our organizations. As Bledstein (1976) has noted, the professions may have replaced social class as the primary way we stratify societies. The source of information is particularly important in this culture. If a certified “professional” has offered information, then it must be accurate—even if a professional (such as Hatfill) is making pronouncements in a field in which they are not qualified. Just as upper-class people once had the privilege of speaking “truth” so professionals are privileged today as “truth tellers.”
For those aligned with the managerial culture, it is the type of information that determines if it receives attention and is assumed to be valid. It is all about numbers and about the relationship between numbers and money. If something can be measured, and numbers can be derived from this measurement, then the information derived is considered accurate and useful. The numbers are even more useful if they related to the “bottom line.” Anything qualitative is considered “speculative” and is vulnerable to distortion. The managerial culture is filled with people who believe that you can “lie” with words, but not with number.
