Machtastic.

Can the truth exist in a machiavellian state?

Had I the patience to complete honours in psychology, I would really love to test this question. I'm proposing a machiavellian gladiator of sorts. A battle of wits, and of truth. Imagine a machiavellian writing a psychological test for another machiavellian. 

Much of our psychological research on this personality type fail for want of reliability, given that machiavellians are often able to deduce the purpose of the test, and therefore manipulate their answers to accord with the hypothesis of the experimenter. They lack the truth, because the truth undermines the power of the machiavellian. 

Sure, we have some checks and balances in place when testing personality disorders, but these too can be manipulated. The skilled machiavellian should, hypothetically, be able to overcome these tests. 

So, who wins when a machiavellian writes the test? Do the machs cancel each other out? Are there degrees of machiavellian personality; and therefore we would see the stronger mach win?Do we end up with the truth in a machiavellian state? Or, are they so incapable of truth, that we end further from the truth than when the testing began?...