“In some cases, those who express extreme views start believing the things they share even if their initial goal was only to increase their standing within a group. And then there are cases where the theories being shared are so outlandish or unlikely that we have to wonder: Do they really believe these things? If we were to sit the person down for a polygraph test and quiz them about whether they truly think the earth is flat, the grieving parents who lost their children to gun violence are just actors, or Hillary Clinton is a pedophile, what would we find? Would they (or the lie detector machine) reveal that perhaps their beliefs are not quite so literal? If so, why are they spreading such lies? Understanding the mechanics of social groups—especially those connected by shared beliefs, such as religious groups, sects, and cults—can help shed light on this question. As Jonathan Haidt suggested, the deliberate sharing of a lie can act as a shibboleth—a kind of linguistic password that identifies people within a group. “Many who study religion have noted that it’s the very impossibility of a claim that makes it a good signal of one’s commitment to the faith,” he wrote. “You don’t need faith to believe obvious things. Proclaiming that the election was stolen surely does play an identity-advertising role in today’s America.”