The irony here is that everything that surfaced makes him the very person you'd want to be learning about the subject from. He's not being dishonest in being an

The irony here is that everything that surfaced makes him the very person you'd want to be learning about the subject from. He's not being dishonest in being an expert on dishonesty-- he is clearly familiar with the topic if he's being accused of it himself. If true, the man walks the walk, so we'd benefit from listening to him talk. This is one of those "trust but verify" situations. If it can't be verified, do not trust. Ariely will not be the last case of this in our lifetimes. Much more effective than endless pontificating and theorizing by people who have no idea what the fuck they're doing but haven't publicly fucked up yet so we trust them in reverence of their credentials. The amount of institutionalized deception that has permeated the field of psychology since its inception should scare anybody away from ever taking it seriously.