The enlightenment over coffee with the pastor

I was friends with a Protestant pastor for a few years. It was a fascinating friendship – we discussed everything: life, the universe, and everything else. Through this, I also learned a lot about the inner workings of the church as an organization.

One day my friend told me about his theological training and introduced a concept that turned my worldview upside down: Exegesis.

"How does that work?" I asked curiously.

"It's quite simple," he explained with a mischievous smile. "You get a Bible text and you're supposed to interpret it so that it relates to everyday life. But – and this is the key – at the same time as the text, you also get the result that you're supposed to produce."

I almost dropped my coffee cup. "So, the outcome is predetermined from the start?"

"Exactly! You just need to find the right words for it."

At that moment I realized: Exegesis is the exact opposite of scientific research.

Sherlock Holmes meets Johann Tetzel

In genuine scientific research, you proceed like Sherlock Holmes: You observe a phenomenon, ask yourself a question, gather clues and facts, piece them together like a puzzle – and only at the end do you see the complete picture. Sometimes the result is as expected, sometimes completely surprising. That's what makes it so exciting: the Sherlock's trail.

Exegesis, on the other hand, functions like Johann Tetzel, the infamous indulgence preacher from the 16th century. This Dominican friar already had the "solution" ready before he even opened the Bible: "Pay, and you are redeemed!" No matter the sin, no matter the biblical passage – Tetzel twisted everything to his will so that the desired result was achieved. Pure Tetzel trickery.

When politics plays science

Now one might think: "Well, that's just how things were in the church back then." But this is where it gets interesting – and disturbing.

In recent years, politicians have increasingly tried to justify their decisions with scientific evidence. A fantastic development in itself! If only there weren't a small problem: on closer inspection, much of what is sold as "science" turns out to be disguised exegesis.

Whether it's pandemic policy, climate protection with mandatory levies, or social and tax policy – I almost always come across sources that do not represent open-ended research, but rather modern Tetzel-style trickery.

The Anatomy of Tetzel's Trickery 2.0

Option 1: The bought truth The researchers tasked with investigating the phenomenon are funded. Economic dependence + human psychology = predictable result. Scientists reliant on public funding become astonishingly creative in finding precisely what the funder wants to hear. Even agencies subordinate to a ministry will miraculously always arrive at results that support the ministry's line.

Variant 2: The Summary Trap Fortunately, not all scientists are corruptible. So, another strategy: assembling a panel of independent researchers who truly work without bias. Their documentation, of course, is far too long and complex for ordinary political decision-makers.

So a "management summary" is fabricated – by someone who is paid by politicians and has a very specific agenda. This person will write the summary in such a way as to suggest precisely the desired political decision.

Voilà! Even with incorruptible, open-minded scientists, we ultimately have a political decision-making basis with a predefined result.

The psychological mechanism behind it

As a psychologist, I'm fascinated by the mechanism behind it. Humans have a natural tendency to Confirmation bias (Confirmation bias). We preferentially seek out information that supports our existing beliefs and ignore contradictory evidence.

Tetzel was already familiar with this mechanism 500 years ago – he just didn't call it that. He knew: people prefer to buy a simple solution rather than a complicated truth.

Modern political consultants have perfected this principle. They don't deliver the truth, but rather what the client wants to hear – packaged scientifically and garnished with statistics.

Why this is dangerous

The problem is not merely academic. If important strategic and political decisions are based on Tetzel-like trickery instead of Sherlock Holmes-like detective work, then we are making decisions based on wishful thinking rather than reality.

The consequences? Billions spent on ineffective programs. Laws that achieve the opposite of their intended purpose. And an increasingly skeptical public that is losing faith in "science."

The problem is not science itself – but its misuse.

What we need: More Holmes, less Tetzel

The solution is actually quite simple: We need more open-ended research in the sense of Sherlock's detective work and less Tetzel-like trickery.

Specifically, this means:

• True independence: Researchers should not be financially dependent on the results of their studies.
• Transparent methodology: How was the research conducted? Who paid for it? What data was omitted?
• Contradictory Evidence: Which studies come to different conclusions?
• Smart decision-makers: Politicians who only accept open-ended analyses as the basis for their decisions

Conclusion: Time for a reformation

Johann Tetzel unintentionally triggered the Reformation – his indulgence sermons led Luther to write his famous 95 Theses.

Perhaps it is time for a new reformation: a reformation of scientific integrity in politics.

We don't need any more Tetzels. We need people who are interested in finding the truth. And we need decision-makers who have the courage to base their decisions on real facts – even if those facts are inconvenient.

Because in the end, the truth is like a good detective novel: it may be complicated and sometimes surprising, but it is always more exciting than a pre-packaged solution.

In this sense: Elementary, my dear Watson!

Dr. Stephan Meyer is a psychologist, keynote speaker, and expert on change and progress. As "Doctor Change," he supports decision-makers in addressing complex challenges with scientific clarity.