Truth Claims (Part II): The Anatomy of Manufactured Certainty

How Education, Propaganda, and Economic Pressure Erode the Examined Life

ὁ δὲ ἀνεξέταστος βίος οὐ βιωτὸς ἀνθρώπῳ

The unexamined life is not worth living for a human being.

—Plato, Apology (38a)

“A great deal of widespread irrational certainty is due to the inherent irrationality and credulity of average human nature. But this ... is nourished and fostered by other agencies, among which three play the chief part—namely, education, propaganda, and economic pressure.” — Bertrand Russell, Free Thought and Official Propaganda (1922)

Cognitive Heuristics and Biases

Russell’s assertion that widespread irrational certainty derives from the inherent credulity of average human nature anticipates a vast body of cognitive psychology demonstrating that unexamined cognition relies on heuristics that sacrifice accuracy for efficiency. Kahneman (2011) established that the human mind defaults to “System 1” processes: fast, intuitive judgments that often yield overconfidence and error. Tversky and Kahneman (1974) documented how heuristics such as availability bias (the tendency to judge how likely something is based on how easily examples come to mind, rather than on actual statistical evidence) and representativeness systematically distort probabilistic reasoning, producing unwarranted certainty in beliefs derived from salient but unrepresentative examples. Sloman and Fernbach (2017) further showed that individuals overestimate their understanding of complex phenomena, succumbing to the “illusion of explanatory depth,” which reinforces their conviction in views that are superficially coherent but substantively hollow. Shermer (1997) argued that these mental shortcuts evolved to enhance survival in ancestral environments but now render individuals susceptible to pseudoscience and ideological manipulation. In this sense, Russell’s phrase “inherent irrationality” presciently names what would later be described as the cognitive architecture of heuristic bias, a default reliance on approximate reasoning that yields confidence disproportionate to justification.

This Article builds on the foundation laid in Truth Claims (Part I): Why Truth Still Matters in a World of Lies, Bias, and Cognitive Evasion, where I argued that truth is not a luxury but the moral and philosophical precondition for any society that hopes to remain free. In this second installment, I turn to Bertrand Russell’s prescient warning that the human mind’s inherent credulity is not merely an accident of nature, but a resource systematically cultivated by institutions, education, propaganda, and economic pressure that prefer compliance to inquiry. Russell’s insight illuminates why the examined life has become an endangered exercise even in nominally free societies.

In forthcoming essays, Truth Claims (Part III) will explore Aporia, productive doubt, as an antidote to dogmatic certainty. Parts IV and V will set out the indispensable role of critical thinking and philosophical reasoning as disciplines of resistance. Together, these reflections attempt to reclaim truth not as a slogan but as a living ethic: the only safeguard against the machinery of unthinking.

Emotion and Intuition

Complementing these cognitive limitations are the emotional and intuitive substrates of belief that Russell implicitly recognized when he described credulity as a pervasive trait of untrained minds. Damasio (1994) demonstrated that somatic markers, physiological signals that encode affective responses, generate powerful “gut feelings” that influence judgment long before conscious analysis occurs. LeDoux (2002) showed that emotionally salient memories encoded in the amygdala can bypass cortical pathways, creating fast, automatic responses that feel self-evidently true. Haidt (2012) argued that moral judgments are primarily intuitive, with reasoning emerging later as a rationalization of pre-existing affective commitments. This perspective underscores Russell’s contention that irrational certainty is not merely a failure of logic but a byproduct of neurobiological systems that evolved to prioritize coherence, emotional salience, and social affiliation over detached inquiry. Accordingly, the credulity Russell lamented can be understood as an affect-laden conviction arising from the integration of emotion and cognition.

Social and Tribal Dynamics

Russell’s claim that credulity is “widespread” suggests that it is not merely an individual failing, but a social phenomenon reinforced by group dynamics. Mercier and Sperber (2017) proposed that human reasoning evolved primarily for social justification, to persuade others and defend one’s standing within a coalition, rather than for disinterested truth-seeking. Haidt (2012) similarly argued that the desire for social belonging incentivizes conformity to group beliefs, regardless of their empirical merit. Sapolsky (2017) added that hierarchies and status anxieties suppress prefrontal cortex function, making individuals more reactive and prone to in-group bias. This convergence of findings supports Russell’s observation that the “irrationality” of average human nature is not only a cognitive default but also a socially incentivized orientation toward uncritical assent. When beliefs confer social capital, dissent becomes emotionally and materially costly, entrenching convictions that would otherwise dissolve under scrutiny.

Neuropsychological Asymmetry and Simplification

Russell’s depiction of unreflective certainty resonates with McGilchrist’s (2009) analysis of hemispheric asymmetry. McGilchrist contended that the left hemisphere privileges categorization, closure, and conceptual certainty, often at the expense of contextual nuance and openness. When the left hemisphere dominates, it produces a “hall of mirrors” in which self-reinforcing simplifications crowd out alternative interpretations. This dynamic aligns with Russell’s assertion that credulity is “inherent”: the neurocognitive bias toward over-simplification is not pathological but structurally embedded. The right hemisphere’s capacity to tolerate ambiguity and sustain reflective doubt is easily overruled when ideological narratives activate left-hemispheric schemas, resulting in the premature foreclosure of inquiry. This phenomenon helps explain why “irrational certainty” flourishes under the conditions Russell described.

Evolutionary and Philosophical Perspectives on Credulity

Finally, Russell’s characterization of credulity as a species-wide trait anticipates evolutionary and philosophical analyses of belief formation. Dennett (2013) argued that the human brain’s interpretive stance, the evolved tendency to attribute agency and coherence, produces intuitions that feel certain even in the absence of evidence. Shermer (1997) described this as “patternicity,” the inclination to perceive patterns and intentionality that may be illusory but confer emotional reassurance. These perspectives confirm Russell’s intuition that widespread irrational certainty is a predictable outcome of evolved cognitive strategies rather than a mere artifact of defective reasoning. Far from representing an aberration, credulity is the mind’s default setting when left unschooled by disciplined critical thinking.

Integrative Synthesis

Synthesizing these insights reveals that Russell’s description of average human nature as inherently irrational and credulous is strikingly prescient. The converging evidence from cognitive psychology (Kahneman, Tversky, Sloman, Shermer), affective neuroscience (Damasio, LeDoux), social psychology (Haidt, Mercier & Sperber, Sapolsky), neuropsychology (McGilchrist), and philosophy of mind (Dennett) corroborates his claim that the default condition of the untrained mind is to embrace comforting illusions and resist dissonant evidence. This baseline credulity is neither a personal failing nor a historically contingent weakness but a structural feature of evolved cognition and social life. For Russell, the recognition of this fact was not grounds for fatalism but an urgent call to cultivate habits of reflective skepticism and critical inquiry. Without such cultivation, the human tendency toward irrational certainty becomes the fertile ground in which propaganda takes root and moral catastrophe becomes possible.

When Russell asserts that credulity is “nourished and fostered by other agencies,” he shifts his analysis from the cognitive baseline of human nature to the deliberate or systemic cultivation of that baseline through social institutions. The verbs nourished and fostered imply a process that is neither entirely accidental nor wholly conspiratorial, but rather the predictable outcome of structures whose interests are served by epistemic conformity. Russell uses “agencies” in a broad sense: organized forces that channel perception, sanction dissent, and define the limits of acceptable belief. This conceptualization foreshadows later accounts of ideology as a social product. For example, Gramsci (1971) developed the notion of cultural hegemony to describe how ruling groups establish norms that become internalized by the governed as natural or inevitable. In Russell’s framework, education, propaganda, and economic pressure are not merely background influences but the chief instruments by which uncritical consensus is produced and maintained (Russell, 1922).

Education as Indoctrination

Russell’s critique of education as a principal agent of credulity anticipates the argument that schooling often functions less to cultivate independent judgment than as a mechanism for standardizing thought. Paulo Freire (1970) described this phenomenon as the banking model of education, in which knowledge is deposited into passive recipients rather than being dialogically constructed. This approach encourages the reproduction of dominant narratives rather than critical engagement. John Dewey (1938) similarly warned that when education becomes a matter of rote memorization and unexamined authority, it trains individuals to accept prepackaged certainties. Noam Chomsky (2000) argued that modern schooling frequently operates as an instrument of social control, instilling obedience to institutional imperatives rather than fostering intellectual autonomy. This analysis aligns precisely with Russell’s contention that education does not simply fail to counter credulity but actively cultivates it by rewarding conformity and punishing questioning. Thus, the classroom becomes an environment where the mind is habituated to defer judgment, making it especially vulnerable to subsequent ideological manipulation.

Propaganda as Engineered Certainty

Russell identifies propaganda as a second principal force that systematically amplifies uncritical conviction. Unlike the implicit curriculum of education, propaganda functions as an explicit instrument of persuasion, saturating public consciousness with emotionally resonant messages that preclude reflective doubt. Walter Lippmann (1922) described this process as the manufacturing of consent, in which the mediated presentation of events substitutes for direct experience, creating a “pseudo-environment” that shapes perception and belief. Edward Bernays (1928) argued that propaganda is an inevitable feature of mass society, necessary for organizing opinion along desired lines. Jacques Ellul (1965) contended that modern propaganda operates through lies and the total environment of repetition, simplification, and moral polarization. Kahneman (2011) demonstrated empirically that repeated exposure to a claim increases its perceived truth through the illusion of truth effect. In this sense, propaganda exploits the mind’s reliance on fluency and familiarity, transforming the inherent cognitive preference for simplicity into a vehicle for ideological domination. Russell’s insight here is prescient: propaganda is not an incidental byproduct of politics but a principal mechanism by which irrational certainty is cultivated and sustained.

Economic Pressure as a Disciplinary Force

The third agency Russell identifies is economic pressure, highlighting how material dependencies constrain intellectual autonomy. Marx (1867) argued that economic relations shape consciousness by tethering individuals to conditions of survival that disincentivize dissent. Gramsci (1971) expanded this analysis by showing how economic precarity reinforces cultural hegemony: the fear of exclusion or deprivation compels individuals to internalize dominant values. Chomsky (1989) observed that in capitalist democracies, the threat of losing employment operates as a silent but powerful form of censorship. Sapolsky (2017) has demonstrated how chronic economic stress impairs prefrontal cortex functioning, diminishing the capacity for deliberation and increasing susceptibility to conformist pressures. This convergence of economic and psychological dynamics fulfills Russell’s claim that economic pressure is not merely a backdrop but an active “agency” that fosters credulity. In societies where livelihood is contingent on ideological conformity, the cost of independent thinking becomes prohibitively high, making public orthodoxy the path of least resistance.

Integrative Synthesis: The Symbiotic System

Russell’s enumeration of education, propaganda, and economic pressure anticipates a systems theory of ideological reproduction in which these forces operate synergistically. Education habituates the mind to deference; propaganda floods consciousness with emotionally charged narratives; economic pressure disciplines potential dissent. Together, they convert the latent credulity of untrained cognition into active compliance with hegemonic beliefs. McGilchrist (2009) has argued that this convergence of social and institutional pressures accelerates the left hemisphere’s preference for certainty and categorization, creating a closed interpretive schema resistant to counter-evidence. From this perspective, the phenomenon Russell describes is not merely the sum of discrete influences but a total environment, what Ellul (1965) called a “propaganda milieu” in which questioning becomes both psychologically taxing and materially dangerous. This environment ensures that irrational certainty is not merely probable but virtually inevitable in the absence of deliberate intellectual cultivation. Russell’s diagnosis remains urgently relevant: it challenges us to recognize that freedom of thought is never a natural state but must be continually defended against the institutions that find credulity more convenient than inquiry.

This article builds directly upon Truth Claims (Part I): Why Truth Still Matters in a World of Lies, Bias, and Cognitive Evasion, which examined some of the philosophical foundations of truth and the epistemic crises we currently face. In this second installment, I turn to one of Russell’s most prescient insights, which identifies human credulity and the institutional forces that manufacture false certainty on a massive scale. Education, propaganda, and economic pressure: these three forces now operate with greater sophistication than ever before. Understanding their mechanisms is essential if we are to reclaim the pursuit of truth as an intellectual, moral, and civic imperative:

How are false certainties manufactured in today’s world? Following Russell’s 1922 warning about education, propaganda, and economic pressure, I explore how these forces now collude to shape our public narratives. Why do so many believe in falsehoods with moral certainty? Why is intellectual dissent so often silenced? Truth Claims (Part II) examines the anatomy of this crisis and why the pursuit of truth remains an urgent act of resistance. This provides the necessary foundation to consider how social institutions amplify these tendencies into systemic forces.

The Manufacture of False Certainty

In Truth Claims (Part I), I argued that in an age awash with lies, distortions, and ideological biases, the disciplined pursuit of truth is both a philosophical vocation and a moral imperative. Truth is not a casual adornment to belief, nor a mere rhetorical flourish; it is the foundation of intellectual freedom, justice, and human dignity. However, the pursuit of truth today faces human frailty and systemic opposition.

Writing more than a century ago, Russell identified a triad of forces that conspire to nurture irrational certainty: education, propaganda, and economic pressure. In our present moment, these forces operate with unprecedented scope and power. They do not merely exploit human gullibility; they actively manufacture it. They construct environments in which falsehood flourishes and certainty becomes unmoored from reality.

This article examines Russell’s prophetic insight and relevance to our epistemic crisis. How do these three forces shape our perception of truth? How do they foster the conditions in which falsehoods protecting absolutist ideologies gain a purchase, develop, and dominate? As intellectual and moral agents, how can we resist this all-encompassing encroachment on freedom of expression and justifiable criticism?

The Inherent Irrationality of Human Nature

Human beings are not, by nature, truth-seeking machines. Evolution shaped our cognitive architecture primarily for survival, social cohesion, and persuasive advantage, not for dispassionate epistemic virtue (Kahneman, 2011; Mercier & Sperber, 2017). While our reliance on heuristics, mental shortcuts such as confirmation bias and availability bias, enables swift decision-making in uncertain environments (Kahneman, 2011), the gradual evolution of the prefrontal cortex endowed us with unprecedented executive functions, including self-reflection, inhibition of impulsive responses, and metacognitive awareness (LeDoux, 2002; Dennett, 1991).

LeDoux describes the prefrontal cortex as the neural seat of the “synaptic self,” capable of integrating emotional memory and conscious appraisal to produce more nuanced judgments (LeDoux, 2002). Dennett argues that this sentient layer of cognition empowers us to construct and evaluate counterfactuals, to model alternative possibilities, and to escape the tyranny of purely reactive, reptilian instincts (Dennett, 1991). Yet, as modern propaganda and absolutist ideologies exploit our evolved vulnerability to cognitive dissonance and tribal identification, they can override this sophisticated neural circuitry, effectively regressing the brain’s executive capacities into more primitive, reflexive patterns of submission and fear (LeDoux, 2002; Kahneman, 2011; Mercier & Sperber, 2017).

We are prone to cognitive shortcuts, or heuristics, that enable fast decisions but often distort reality (Kahneman, 2011). Confirmation bias, availability bias, motivated reasoning, and tribal loyalty are not aberrations, but default modes of inference shaped by evolutionary pressures that favor expedient judgments over epistemic accuracy (Mercier & Sperber, 2017; Kahneman, 2011). As Russell observed in The Problems of Philosophy, human beings exhibit a persistent tendency toward credulity, particularly when emotionally charged beliefs are reinforced by collective sentiment (Russell, 1912). He later warned in Free Thought and Official Propaganda that the “irrational certainty” arising from this predisposition is systematically exploited by modern institutions, which magnify our biases through repetition, simplification, and rhetorical manipulation (Russell, 1922).

A. J. Ayer similarly argued in The Problem of Knowledge that the psychological allure of coherence and the vividness of narrative can override empirical evidence, leading individuals to accept assertions as true simply because they appear internally consistent or emotionally persuasive (Ayer, 1956). This is the antithesis of the Hegelian dialectic, the pursuit of which is obtaining the “Absolute Idea” and the ultimate representation of “absolute Reality” (Hegel as cited in Russell, 1912). That is, adherence solely to the vividness of narrative reduces epistemic claims to “incompleteness” (Russell, 1912).

Neuroscientific research deepens this diagnosis. LeDoux has shown that emotionally salient memories, stored in the amygdala and limbic circuitry, can trigger automatic responses that bypass rational scrutiny, especially under threat (LeDoux, 2002). Damasio’s theory of somatic markers demonstrates how visceral bodily signals create intuitive “gut feelings” that often circumvent judgment before conscious reasoning can intervene (Damasio, 1994). In later work, Damasio describes “the feeling of knowing” as a compelling subjective certainty that arises from these somatic markers, often disconnected from actual evidentiary justification (Damasio, 1999). McGilchrist argues that the right hemisphere, more attuned to nuance, ambiguity, and context, is frequently subordinated by the left hemisphere’s tendency toward rigid categorization and certainty, a dynamic he calls “the tyranny of the left hemisphere” (McGilchrist, 2009). Under ideological pressure, this asymmetry becomes more pronounced: the left hemisphere imposes a simplified, closed interpretive schema that flattens complexity and resists contradiction.

Sapolsky further observes that social stressors, hierarchies, and in-group pressures neurologically constrain the prefrontal cortex’s executive functions, making individuals more likely to default to tribal moral intuitions and less capable of sustained analytical thinking (Sapolsky, 2017). Echoing these findings, Erik Lenderman emphasizes that the persistence of cognitive distortions is not merely a byproduct of evolution but also a consequence of unexamined habits of attention and cultural conditioning; he argues that self-inquiry and deliberate self-regulation are indispensable for counteracting the psychological capture that ideological systems perpetuate (Lenderman, 2021). Together, these perspectives suggest that the architecture of belief is not inherently designed for dispassionate truth-seeking but for social stability and cognitive economy, leaving us acutely vulnerable to organized systems of persuasion that do not seek knowledge but power (Kahneman, 2011; Russell, 1922; McGilchrist, 2009; Sapolsky, 2017; Lenderman, 2021).

Education: From Enlightenment to Indoctrination

While Russell warned that formal schooling often conditions the mind toward deference rather than inquiry, the contemporary crisis has deepened far beyond his prescient critique, merging old patterns of indoctrination with new ideological and technological dynamics. Across much of Western academia, education no longer serves the pursuit of truth. Ideological movements have captured it: neo-Marxism, postmodern relativism, “decolonial” frameworks, and certain strands of “critical” theories that reject objective truth as an oppressive construct. As Lyotard (1984) observed, postmodernism revels in an “incredulity toward metanarratives,” dissolving truth into power games.

The result is a profound corruption of the educational mission. Students are trained to view all knowledge as socially constructed, all truth as relative, and all disagreement as a form of violence. The basic tools of rational inquiry: logic, evidence, and dialectical reasoning, are devalued or displaced by the worship of “lived experience” and ideological conformity. This is not education; it is indoctrination. It produces minds ill-equipped to test truth claims or resist propaganda. It breeds intellectual fragility masked as moral certainty. It ensures that whole generations emerge into the public sphere primed for manipulation.

Propaganda: The Architecture of Manipulated Reality

Propaganda is not merely false information. Where Russell and Ellul described the general dynamics of propaganda in the early mass media age, today’s digital ecosystem has multiplied and weaponized those same dynamics with unprecedented reach and neurological precision. It is the deliberate construction of a manipulated reality, a web of narratives, images, and slogans designed to bypass rational scrutiny and capture the mind (Pacepa & Rychlak, 2013). Propaganda operates with unparalleled reach and speed in the digital and post-truth age. Social media algorithms favor content that triggers emotion, not reflection. The attention economy rewards outrage, not accuracy. Viral narratives drown out careful inquiry. What emerges is not a marketplace of ideas, but an echo chamber of manipulation.

The neurological effects are profound. As I showed in Truth Claims (Part I), emotionally charged imagery, such as the “genocide” and “apartheid” lies wielded against Israel, hijacks the sympathetic nervous system, triggering fight-or-flight responses (van der Kolk, 2015; Porges, 2011). Cognitive faculties are bypassed; emotional coherence replaces analytical truth. Propaganda does not merely mislead; it rewires. This is not accidental. It is an engineered strategy. So-called purveyors of front-page news adhere to the adage “If it bleeds, it leads!” Whether deployed by Islamist networks, neo-Marxist activists, or authoritarian states, propaganda systematically exploits human cognitive vulnerabilities to foster irrational certainty. It manufactures moral conviction where none is warranted, enlists emotion against fact, and weaponizes narrative against truth.

Economic Pressure: The Material Incentives of Falsehood

Russell’s third factor, economic pressure, remains perhaps the most neglected, yet it is critical. The machinery of modern falsehood is not only ideological but financial. The manufacture of certainty is profitable. Media outlets thrive on sensationalism; “clicks” drive revenue. Outrage sells. Nuanced truth does not. NGO networks flourish on narratives of grievance and victimhood, which attract funding and institutional power. Academic departments secure grants and prestige through ideological conformity, not intellectual dissent. Corporate entities engage in performative virtue signaling— “woke capitalism”—to shield themselves from reputational attacks while serving market interests.

In such an environment, strong material incentives exist to propagate falsehood and suppress inconvenient truth. Intellectual courage is costly; ideological complicity is rewarded. The result is a systemic distortion of the public sphere. Economic forces do not merely amplify propaganda; they entrench it. Russell saw this clearly: irrational certainty is not only natural, but also engineered, cultivated by institutions whose interests are served by the maintenance of falsehood.

Toward a Normative Ethic of Resistance

Russell’s warning is even more urgent today than in 1922. The forces he named, education, propaganda, and economic pressure, now operate synergistically, amplified by global communication and power networks. In this environment, the pursuit of truth is not merely an intellectual preference but a moral and existential imperative. Thinking clearly, questioning relentlessly, and testing claims and conspiracy theories against reality are acts of resistance. They are duties owed not only to the integrity of the mind but also to preserving civilization itself.

If we abandon the discipline of truth, we surrender reason to power, freedom to tyranny, justice to falsehood. In a world where certainty is manufactured and lies are profitable, the pursuit of truth must be cultivated as a virtue: with humility, courage, and vigilance. As I wrote in Truth Claims (Part I): “It is not enough to believe. We must know. It is not enough to assert. We must justify. It is not enough to feel. We must think.” That remains our task. That remains our calling.

Epilogue

In placing Socrates’ insistence that “the unexamined life is not worth living” at the head of this Article, I intended not merely to pay homage to the origins of Western philosophy but to remind us that the examined life is precisely what education, propaganda, and economic pressure increasingly erode. As I have shown, Russell’s diagnosis retains its urgency because these forces have not diminished in potency but have multiplied through technological saturation, ideological capture, and the monetization of distraction. Education, which once promised to cultivate independent judgment, too often prescribes and proscribes responses in ways that channel students into conformity rather than authentic inquiry.

Propaganda, once confined to state organs and newspapers, now saturates every channel of daily life, with social media platforms and algorithmic echo chambers actively cultivating cognitive dissonance, accelerating heuristic shortcuts, and embedding confirmation bias so deeply that sustained inquiry becomes both countercultural and psychologically taxing. Economic pressure, ever more acute in precarious economies, coerces compliance with dominant narratives under threat of marginalization or deprivation.

Together, they have created an environment in which the examined life, self-scrutinizing, dialectic, and commitment to epistemic integrity have become not the norm but the exception. In the forthcoming Truth Claims (Part III), I will examine the role of aporia, genuine perplexity, as both the philosophical birthplace of inquiry and the antidote to manufactured certainty. Truth Claims (Part IV) will explore why systematic, sustained instruction in critical thinking must be revived as an intellectual and civic imperative. Truth Claims (Part V) will argue that the disciplined cultivation of reasoning is the most promising defense against the new totalitarian consensus.

References

Ayer, A. J. (1936). Language, truth and logic. Gollancz.

Ayer, A. J. (1956). The problem of knowledge. Macmillan.

Bernays, E. L. (1928). Propaganda. Horace Liveright.

Chomsky, N. (1989). Necessary illusions: Thought control in democratic societies. South End Press.

Chomsky, N. (2000). Chomsky on miseducation. Rowman & Littlefield.

Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. Putnam.

Dennett, D. C. (1991). Consciousness explained. Little, Brown and Company.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.

Ellul, J. (1965). Propaganda: The formation of men’s attitudes (K. Kellen & J. Lerner, Trans.). Knopf.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. Bergman Ramos, Trans.). Continuum.

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks (Q. Hoare & G. N. Smith, Eds. & Trans.). International Publishers.

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

LeDoux, J. (2002). The synaptic self: How our brains become who we are. Viking.

Lippmann, W. (1922). Public opinion. Harcourt, Brace.

Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. University of Minnesota Press.

Marx, K. (1867). Capital: A critique of political economy (Vol. 1). Penguin.

McGilchrist, I. (2009). The master and his emissary: The divided brain and the making of the Western world. Yale University Press.

McIntyre, L. (2018). Post-Truth. MIT Press.

Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2017). The enigma of reason. Harvard University Press.

Pacepa, I. M., & Rychlak, R. J. (2013). Disinformation. WND Books.

Porges, S. W. (2011). The Polyvagal Theory: Neurophysiological Foundations of Emotions, Attachment, Communication, and Self-regulation. Norton.

Russell, B. (1912). The problems of philosophy. Williams and Norgate.

Russell, B. (1922). Free thought and official propaganda. Watts & Co.

Sapolsky, R. M. (2017). Behave: The biology of humans at our best and worst. Penguin Press.

van der Kolk, B. (2015). The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma. Viking.