Description: To what degree are theories of social exchange (cf. Homans 1957, 1972) helpful in understanding educational interactions in the classroom and in the family? What roles might deception strategies such as falsification, concealment and equivocation (Buller & Burgoon 1996; Nyberg 1996) play in asymmetric long-term relationships such as the teacher-student-relationship or the parent-child-relationship? And in what ways may such educational interactions and strategies also be shaped and affected by positive illusions and self-deceptions (Taylor 1993)? This paper focuses on the significance and interrelationships of social exchange, deception and self-deception. It presents a model of social influence in order to understand specific pedagogical concepts, especially authority, as an exchange of deceptions or a process which might well be supported by self-decptional attribution patterns and/or ironic attitudes (on both sides of the ecuational relationship).The philosophical or ethical background of the paper refers to Nyberg's view of deception as "an essential component of our ability to organize and shape the world, to resolve problems of coordination among individuals who differ, to cope with uncertainty and pain, to be civil and to achieve privacy as needed, to survive as a species, and to flourish as persons" (Nyberg 1996, S. 187). As Kant already noted in Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view (1789, first book, § 12), deceptional behavior might stand at the beginning - or can be understood as a fundament - of civil society. (1) Social exchange, (2) deception and (3) self-deception may thus play a heavily underestimated role in the process of acquiring the competencies and attitudes necessary for constituting and participating in a "decent society" (Margalit), in which "civility" is not idealized but practiced.As the belief in "non-truths" does not always imply negative consequences and the knowledge of truth my have destructive ones, insight into the insufficiency of the ideal of authenticity should become obvious. The role and ideal of authenticity, however, have not yet radically enough been criticized in education. The paper attempts to discuss the provocative thesis that education actually is engaged (and also should be engaged) in fostering the competencies for participating in an ethos of inauthenticity at the heart of which the art of display and concealment plays a crucial role. Methodology: I will present the theoretical background and philosophical premises of an empirical study on exchange and deception that started this month (January 2006).