I am not very literate in game theory, but I have sort of skimmed
the idea of it. Just writing this down while I remember it:
If one was interested in "proving"
why some sort of intellectual anarchy is
necessary, look for a game theoretical model
that puts a public persona against a random
individual in sphere of information.
What you will find is that the public
persona will almost never be incentiviced
to be honest while the random individual
is benefited most by honesty.
Case: Covid and honest medical facts as far
as facts were available. When putting forward
information, the public persona will have
an extra factor to count in compared
to a random individual: The public persona
will select the information imparted down
so as to not cause panic. For a random individual
the honest information would have been more
useful than the watered down information, but
the panic avoidant talk is more beneficial to
the public persona.
