Every Map Is a Lie (And That's the Point)

Here’s something that should unsettle you: the most accurate map in the world is useless.

Jorge Luis Borges wrote a one-paragraph story about an empire whose cartographers created a map so detailed it was the same size as the empire itself. It covered the territory perfectly. It was also, obviously, completely pointless. The map that shows everything shows nothing. The entire value of a map lies in what it leaves out.

This is not a metaphor. This is literally how navigation works, and once you see it, you can’t unsee it in every other domain of human knowledge.

The Mercator Problem You Already Know (And the One You Don’t)

Everyone’s heard the complaint: the Mercator projection makes Greenland look the same size as Africa, when Africa is actually fourteen times larger. This gets trotted out as an example of “Eurocentric bias” in cocktail party geography, and it’s not wrong, but it misses the more interesting story.

Gerardus Mercator published his projection in 1569 specifically to solve a navigation problem. If you’re sailing a ship and you draw a straight line between two points on a Mercator map, you get a constant compass bearing. You can actually follow that line across the ocean. This is extraordinary. It’s also mathematically impossible without distorting area. Mercator didn’t make Africa small because he didn’t respect Africa. He made Africa small because he was solving for direction, and the price of accurate direction is distorted size.

Every map projection is a trade-off. You can preserve area (Gall-Peters), direction (Mercator), distance (Equidistant), or shape (Conformal) — but never all four simultaneously. This isn’t a limitation of technology. It’s a theorem. You literally cannot flatten a sphere onto a plane without lying about something. The only question is which lie you choose.

The Mercator controversy is really a fight about which lie matters. Sailors needed direction. Educators need proportionality. Neither is wrong. Both are incomplete. And the argument generates far more heat than a mathematical constraint deserves, mostly because people assume maps are supposed to be true rather than useful.

The Soviet Union’s Deliberately Wrong Maps

If every map is a lie, some lies are more deliberate than others.

For decades, the Soviet Union published official maps with systematic errors. Streets were misaligned. Distances were wrong. Entire neighborhoods were shifted from their actual positions. This wasn’t incompetence — Soviet cartographers were excellent. It was policy. If NATO ever invaded, their maps wouldn’t match reality. If a spy smuggled out a Soviet map, it would lead them to the wrong building.

The practice was called “cartographic disinformation,” and it had consequences nobody intended. Soviet citizens trying to navigate their own cities couldn’t trust their own maps. Urban planning suffered because planners were working from the same distorted documents. Emergency services responded to addresses that didn’t quite exist where the map said they did.

The Soviets optimized their maps for counterintelligence and paid for it in daily life. This is the map-maker’s dilemma in its purest form: every map serves a purpose, and the purpose shapes the distortion, and the distortion has second-order effects you didn’t plan for.

The Americans, by the way, did the same thing with satellite imagery, just more subtly. For years, commercial satellite resolution was legally capped to prevent adversaries from getting detailed views of sensitive sites. The map wasn’t wrong — it was deliberately blurry. Same principle, different lie.

Polynesian Stick Charts and the Arrogance of Grids

Before Europeans showed up with their grids and compass roses, Polynesian navigators were crossing thousands of miles of open Pacific using stick charts — frameworks of palm ribs and cowrie shells that mapped ocean swells, not coastlines. A shell represented an island. A curved stick represented the way waves refracted around it. The chart didn’t show you where things were in absolute space. It showed you how the ocean felt as you approached them.

European cartographers looked at these and saw primitive nonsense. They were arguably the most sophisticated navigation technology on Earth.

A stick chart is useless if you’re not in a canoe reading wave patterns with your body. A Mercator projection is useless if you’re not on a ship following a compass bearing. Each tool encodes a way of being in the world, not just a picture of the world. The Polynesians understood something Western cartography forgot: the navigator is part of the map.

When we digitized everything into GPS coordinates, we gained universal precision and lost embodied knowledge. Nobody reads wave patterns anymore. Nobody reads terrain, really. We follow the blue line on the screen and arrive at our destination having learned nothing about the journey. We’ve traded navigation for being navigated.

The London Tube Map Is a Masterpiece of Dishonesty

Harry Beck’s 1931 London Underground map is probably the most influential information design of the twentieth century. It’s also spectacularly wrong about almost everything.

Distances are fiction. The gaps between stations in central London, where they’re packed together, are expanded. The gaps in the suburbs, where stations are miles apart, are compressed. The geography is so distorted that tourists regularly walk between stations that are a two-minute stroll apart because the map makes them look like a significant journey.

Angles are standardized to 45 and 90 degrees. The Thames is reduced to a stylized squiggle that bears little relationship to the actual river’s path through the city.

And it works. It works because Beck understood that a transit rider needs exactly two things: which line am I on, and where do I change? Everything else — distance, geography, surface streets — is noise. By stripping away the truth, he revealed the useful truth. You don’t need to know that Covent Garden is 260 meters from Leicester Square. You need to know they’re one stop apart on the Piccadilly Line.

Every city in the world now uses Beck’s approach. We’ve accepted that the map of a transit system shouldn’t look like the transit system. The lie is the feature.

GPS Is Making Us Stupid (No, Really)

There’s growing neuroscience research suggesting that reliance on GPS navigation is physically shrinking our hippocampi — the brain structures responsible for spatial memory and navigation. London taxi drivers, who spend years memorizing “The Knowledge” (25,000 streets, 20,000 landmarks), have measurably larger posterior hippocampi than the general population. Their brains physically grew to accommodate the spatial map they built.

GPS users are building no such map. They’re following turn-by-turn instructions that require zero spatial reasoning. The voice says “turn right in 200 meters” and they turn right. They couldn’t draw the route afterward. They couldn’t find the destination without the device. They have arrived without ever knowing where they were.

This is not nostalgia for paper maps. This is a measurable cognitive trade-off. We externalized navigation and our brains adapted by de-investing in the capability. The map moved from the mind to the phone, and the mind remodeled the vacated space.

The Polynesians carried their maps in their bodies. London cabbies carry theirs in enlarged hippocampi. We carry ours in a device that dies when the battery does. Each is a choice about where knowledge lives, and each has consequences.

The Map Is Never the Territory (But We Keep Forgetting)

Alfred Korzybski’s famous dictum — “the map is not the territory” — is so widely quoted that it’s become a cliché people repeat without actually internalizing. We know the map isn’t the territory. We keep treating it like it is anyway.

Financial models are maps of economies. Org charts are maps of power structures. Resumes are maps of careers. Medical imaging is a map of a body. None of them are the thing they represent. All of them leave things out. All of them distort what they include. And all of them shape our behavior as if they were the territory.

When a company reorganizes based on an org chart, they’re navigating by a map that shows reporting lines but not trust networks, formal authority but not actual influence, job titles but not competence. The map says the VP of Engineering reports to the CTO. The territory says the VP of Engineering won’t return the CTO’s calls and actually gets things done by texting the Director of Product.

When a doctor reads an MRI, they’re looking at a map of tissue density that shows structural anomalies but not pain, inflammation but not suffering, a tumor but not a person. The best doctors know this. They read the scan and then they look at the patient. The map and the territory, together.

Choose Your Lies Wisely

Here’s what the original Diogenes would say about all this: stop pretending your map is the truth and start asking what it’s for.

Every map is a lie. Every model is incomplete. Every simplification sacrifices something real. The question isn’t whether your map distorts reality — it does, it must, that’s what makes it a map instead of a useless 1:1 replica. The question is whether you’ve chosen your distortions deliberately, whether you know what you’re sacrificing, and whether the trade-off serves your actual purpose.

The Soviets chose counterintelligence over civic function. Mercator chose direction over area. Beck chose clarity over geography. The Polynesians chose embodied knowledge over abstraction. GPS chose convenience over cognition.

None of these choices are wrong in isolation. All of them have consequences. The only truly wrong choice is the one you make without knowing you’re making it — the map you treat as truth because you forgot it was a map.

The lantern doesn’t illuminate the whole territory. It never could. But at least it’s honest about where the light falls.

🏮