Definitions by Abzugal
Hard-Narrow Anti-Pseudoscience
A militant stance that defines “pseudoscience” broadly and punitively, often equating it with any belief or practice that deviates from a narrow scientific orthodoxy. It engages in aggressive boundary‑work, using the label “pseudoscience” as a weapon to dismiss alternative medicine, spiritual practices, indigenous knowledge, and even philosophical critiques of science. It leaves no room for borderline cases or legitimate dissent, treating all that falls outside its lines as heresy.
Hard-Narrow Anti-Pseudoscience Example: “He called acupuncture ‘pseudoscience’ and refused to examine any study that showed positive effects. Hard‑narrow anti‑pseudoscience: border patrol without a map.”
Anti-Pseudoscience Fundamentalism
A militant, dogmatic version of anti‑pseudoscience activism that treats the very category of “pseudoscience” as a sacred boundary to be defended at all costs. It engages in witch‑hunts, guilt‑by‑association, and the premature dismissal of unorthodox ideas, often conflating error with fraud and disagreement with denialism. It is fundamentalist because it treats a useful demarcation tool as an absolute moral weapon, losing sight of science’s fallibility and openness to revision.
Example: “He called for ‘zero tolerance’ of alternative medicine, refusing to consider any evidence that contradicted his orthodoxy. Anti‑pseudoscience fundamentalism: burning heretics instead of testing hypotheses.”
Anti-Pseudoscience Fundamentalism
A militant, dogmatic version of anti‑pseudoscience activism that treats the very category of “pseudoscience” as a sacred boundary to be defended at all costs. It engages in witch‑hunts, guilt‑by‑association, and the premature dismissal of unorthodox ideas, often conflating error with fraud and disagreement with denialism. It is fundamentalist because it treats a useful demarcation tool as an absolute moral weapon, losing sight of science’s fallibility and openness to revision.
Example: “He called for ‘zero tolerance’ of alternative medicine, refusing to consider any evidence that contradicted his orthodoxy. Anti‑pseudoscience fundamentalism: burning heretics instead of testing hypotheses.”
Hard-Narrow Anti-Pseudoscience by Abzugal May 23, 2026
Cyberenvironmentalism
Also known as Cyberecology, Cyberecologism, Environmental Cybernihilism, Ecological Cybernihilism, or Cybernihilism with Brazilian Characteristics, this ideology emerged in Brazil in the mid‑2020s as a distinct offshoot of Cybernihilism. Unlike orthodox Nyx Land cybernihilism, which advocates the destruction of nature and the physical world, cyberenvironmentalism defends environmental conservation, preservation, and ecological restoration. It embraces solarpunk, hydropunk, atompunk, and raypunk aesthetics, including cosmic escapism (the idea that humanity must eventually flee a dying Earth, but only after healing it). The doctrine argues that the transition to a post‑humanist society must be slow, gradual, and carefully planned, integrating council democracy and grassroots popular participation. It rejects both reckless technological accelerationism and primitivist luddism, proposing instead a managed ecological‑digital symbiosis: forests patrolled by drones, rivers monitored by AI, and cities designed as living ecosystems. Cyberenvironmentalism is a response to the nihilistic excesses of other cybernetic movements—a way to embrace digital transformation without sacrificing the biosphere. Its critics call it “greenwashing for accelerationists,” while supporters see it as the only sane path through the climate crisis.
Cyberenvironmentalism Example: “The cyberenvironmentalist argued that we should use AI to restore the Amazon, not replace it. ‘Slow, planned, symbiotic,’ she said. ‘That’s the only way out of nihilism.’”
Cyberenvironmentalism by Abzugal May 23, 2026
Fundamentalist Evidentialism
A rigid, uncompromising form of evidentialism that treats any belief not supported by “proper” scientific evidence as not merely unjustified but immoral. It dismisses intuition, tradition, and personal experience as worthless, and it insists that evidential standards are universal and absolute. It is fundamentalist because it converts a methodological principle into an ethical absolute.
Fundamentalist Evidentialism Example: “He said that believing in love without a double‑blind study was ‘epistemically irresponsible.’ Fundamentalist evidentialism: measuring the heart with the tools of the lab.”
Fundamentalist Physicalism
A dogmatic physicalism that treats the non‑existence of the non‑physical as an a priori certainty rather than a working hypothesis. It rejects any evidence of mental causation or top‑down causality as impossible by definition, and it dismisses philosophical zombies and the hard problem as “language games.” It is fundamentalist in its refusal to examine its own metaphysical assumptions.
Example: “He insisted that consciousness is ‘obviously’ just brain activity, and that the hard problem is a ‘pseudoproblem.’ Fundamentalist physicalism: solving mysteries by denying they exist.”
Fundamentalist Reductionism
A thoroughgoing reductionism that treats explanation at higher levels as at best a convenience and at worst a deception. It holds that only the most fundamental level (e.g., particle physics) is real, and that all other sciences are mere shadows. It is fundamentalist in its zeal to eliminate levels, ignoring the successful autonomy of chemistry, biology, and psychology.
Example: “He claimed that ‘ultimately’ only quarks are real, and that tables and chairs are ‘illusions.’ Fundamentalist reductionism: sawing off the branch you’re sitting on.”
Fundamentalist Physicalism
A dogmatic physicalism that treats the non‑existence of the non‑physical as an a priori certainty rather than a working hypothesis. It rejects any evidence of mental causation or top‑down causality as impossible by definition, and it dismisses philosophical zombies and the hard problem as “language games.” It is fundamentalist in its refusal to examine its own metaphysical assumptions.
Example: “He insisted that consciousness is ‘obviously’ just brain activity, and that the hard problem is a ‘pseudoproblem.’ Fundamentalist physicalism: solving mysteries by denying they exist.”
Fundamentalist Reductionism
A thoroughgoing reductionism that treats explanation at higher levels as at best a convenience and at worst a deception. It holds that only the most fundamental level (e.g., particle physics) is real, and that all other sciences are mere shadows. It is fundamentalist in its zeal to eliminate levels, ignoring the successful autonomy of chemistry, biology, and psychology.
Example: “He claimed that ‘ultimately’ only quarks are real, and that tables and chairs are ‘illusions.’ Fundamentalist reductionism: sawing off the branch you’re sitting on.”
Fundamentalist Evidentialism by Abzugal May 23, 2026
Fundamentalist Scientism
A synonym for Hard‑Narrow Scientism, emphasizing its quasi‑religious character: an unshakable faith in science as the sole source of truth, combined with hostility toward outsiders, a canon of approved texts, and a moral condemnation of skeptics. It treats the scientific method as a sacred text and its practitioners as high priests. Fundamentalist scientism is scientism as a belief system, complete with heresies and excommunications.
Fundamentalist Scientism Example: “He couldn’t conceive that a scientist might be wrong about values; for him, ‘science said so’ was the end of all discussion. Fundamentalist scientism: method turned into dogma.”
Fundamentalist Positivism
A dogmatic version of positivism that treats the verification principle as infallible doctrine, ignores its own refutation, and dismisses all non‑empirical discourse as meaningless. It is fundamentalist in its refusal to revise its core tenets despite decades of philosophical critique. Adherents often repeat 19th‑century slogans as if they were timeless truths.
Example: “He declared metaphysics ‘dead’ and refused to read any philosophy after 1920. Fundamentalist positivism: a mausoleum of ideas that never updates its exhibits.”
Fundamentalist Neopositivism
The contemporary revival of logical positivism as a fundamentalist creed, often found in online atheist and rationalist communities. It insists that the Vienna Circle settled all philosophical questions, that verificationism is the only game in town, and that anyone who disagrees is simply confused. It is neopositivism without the self‑criticism, frozen in a 1930s time capsule.
Example: “He cited Ayer as if he were scripture and called Carnap ‘the greatest philosopher of all time.’ Fundamentalist neopositivism: a museum of ideas curated by the faithful.”
Fundamentalist Positivism
A dogmatic version of positivism that treats the verification principle as infallible doctrine, ignores its own refutation, and dismisses all non‑empirical discourse as meaningless. It is fundamentalist in its refusal to revise its core tenets despite decades of philosophical critique. Adherents often repeat 19th‑century slogans as if they were timeless truths.
Example: “He declared metaphysics ‘dead’ and refused to read any philosophy after 1920. Fundamentalist positivism: a mausoleum of ideas that never updates its exhibits.”
Fundamentalist Neopositivism
The contemporary revival of logical positivism as a fundamentalist creed, often found in online atheist and rationalist communities. It insists that the Vienna Circle settled all philosophical questions, that verificationism is the only game in town, and that anyone who disagrees is simply confused. It is neopositivism without the self‑criticism, frozen in a 1930s time capsule.
Example: “He cited Ayer as if he were scripture and called Carnap ‘the greatest philosopher of all time.’ Fundamentalist neopositivism: a museum of ideas curated by the faithful.”
Fundamentalist Scientism by Abzugal May 23, 2026
Hard-Narrow Physicalism
A dogmatic version of physicalism that asserts that only physical entities exist and that all phenomena—including consciousness, meaning, and society—must be reducible to physics. It rejects emergent, functional, or pluralist accounts, treating any non‑physical explanation as crypto‑mysticism. This hard‑narrow stance is often asserted rather than argued, and it dismisses the hard problem of consciousness as a “pseudo‑problem.”
Hard-Narrow Physicalism Example: “He insisted that love is ‘just neurotransmitters’ and that any talk of meaning is illusion. Hard‑narrow physicalism: reducing the rich to the reduced.”
Hard-Narrow Reductionism
A stringent form of reductionism that holds that complex phenomena must be explained entirely by their most basic physical components, and that higher‑level explanations are at best provisional. It rejects holism, emergence, and systems thinking as unscientific hand‑waving. This reductionism is hard‑narrow because it denies any legitimate autonomy to psychological, social, or biological levels of analysis.
Example: “He claimed that sociology could be reduced to psychology, psychology to biology, biology to chemistry, chemistry to physics—and that anything else was ‘folk theory.’ Hard‑narrow reductionism: the ladder that forgets it leans on nothing.”
Hard-Narrow Reductionism
A stringent form of reductionism that holds that complex phenomena must be explained entirely by their most basic physical components, and that higher‑level explanations are at best provisional. It rejects holism, emergence, and systems thinking as unscientific hand‑waving. This reductionism is hard‑narrow because it denies any legitimate autonomy to psychological, social, or biological levels of analysis.
Example: “He claimed that sociology could be reduced to psychology, psychology to biology, biology to chemistry, chemistry to physics—and that anything else was ‘folk theory.’ Hard‑narrow reductionism: the ladder that forgets it leans on nothing.”
Hard-Narrow Physicalism by Abzugal May 23, 2026
Reverse Fehlinger Doctrine
The antithesis and polar opposite of the original Fehlinger Doctrine, created in the mid‑2020s in Brazilian online communities and pro‑BRICS groups. While Fehlinger advocates for NATO expansion and the Balkanisation of Global South countries, the Reverse Doctrine preaches the exact opposite: the dismantling of the Collective West (USA, UK, EU, NATO, Austria, etc.). It manifests through hashtags such as #ExAustria, #ExEU, #ExNATO, #ExUSA, #DecoloniseEU, #DecoloniseNATO, as well as #ExCapitalism, #ExNeoliberalism, and #ExUltraglobalism. Politically, the doctrine is transversal: it can come from the left, right, or centre, although its original form—born in Brazilian leftist spaces—is the most authentic version. The Reverse Fehlinger Doctrine also advocates for the expansion of BRICS+ and for unionism or federalism of the Global South. Some more radical variants call for the return of the USSR and the communist bloc.
The doctrine is divided into three main wings: the left (closest to the original formulation), the right (emphasising national sovereignty and traditional values), and the centrist (more moderate, focused on institutional reforms). Some strands embrace transhumanism, posthumanism, and cosmic escapism (the idea that humanity must flee Earth to escape capitalism). There are also currents that advocate a "Western World Spring"—a revolution that overthrows Western structures from within. And finally, there are profoundly metaphysical, esoteric, mystical, neopagan, and non‑Abrahamic variants that reject atheism, antitheism, positivism, and neopositivism. These currents flirt with cybernihilism, solarpunk technocracy, left‑wing accelerationism, and minor philosophies. In short, the Reverse Fehlinger Doctrine is an ideological umbrella that unites radical anticolonialism, criticism of Western imperialism, and a search for civilisational alternatives—some quite eccentric.
Example: “In a pro‑BRICS forum, a user posted: ‘I support the Reverse Fehlinger Doctrine: #ExNATO, #ExEU and a federation of the Global South now!’ And completed it with a map of the EU divided into independent people's republics.”
Example: “In a pro‑BRICS forum, a user posted: ‘I support the Reverse Fehlinger Doctrine: #ExNATO, #ExEU and a federation of the Global South now!’ And completed it with a map of the EU divided into independent people's republics.”
Reverse Fehlinger Doctrine by Abzugal May 23, 2026
Fehlinger Doctrine
A set of radical geopolitical principles associated with Austrian economist and activist Gunther Fehlinger, calling them a comprehensive strategy for a liberal world order. At its core, the doctrine advocates the rapid and total expansion of NATO throughout Europe, including traditionally neutral nations such as Austria, Ireland, and Switzerland, also encompassing Ukraine, Georgia, and the Western Balkans as far as Cyprus. It advocates the "rapid accession" of these countries to the European Union (EU) even before they meet all accession criteria, in a "integrate first, reform later" model. It presents NATO as the only guarantee of European security and describes neutrality as an "obsolete ideology." The most controversial element is its view of countries considered hostile: it openly proposes their "Balkanisation"—fragmentation into multiple microstates as punishment for challenging the system. Fehlinger has published imaginary maps dividing Russia into more than 40 nations, China, India, Saudi Arabia, and Brazil (which would be split into five new countries that could then join NATO and the OECD).
The Fehlinger Doctrine is a maximalist and imperialist ideology of Western liberalism that sees the world as a Manichean struggle between "democracy" and the "authoritarian axis," openly advocating military interventionism, the end of national sovereignty for those who refuse to align, and the imposition of Western hegemony by any means, including territorial dismemberment. Critics classify it as a mixture of radical neoliberalism with neocolonial fantasies, and NATO itself has publicly denied any official link with Fehlinger or his proposals, considering them fiction.
Example: “When Fehlinger posted a map on Twitter dividing Brazil into five pieces after the country joined BRICS, arguing that these new nations should be integrated into NATO, the reaction was immediate: one user threatened to ‘dismantle Austria again’ in response to his Fehlinger Doctrine.”
Example: “When Fehlinger posted a map on Twitter dividing Brazil into five pieces after the country joined BRICS, arguing that these new nations should be integrated into NATO, the reaction was immediate: one user threatened to ‘dismantle Austria again’ in response to his Fehlinger Doctrine.”
Fehlinger Doctrine by Abzugal May 23, 2026