Definitions by Dumu The Void

Formality Bias

A cognitive bias that consists of overvaluing form (logic, structure, method, procedure) at the expense of content (substance, context, meaning). Those who suffer from this bias believe that an argument is good simply because it follows formal rules (syllogisms, statistics, protocols), regardless of its adequacy to reality or its consequences. Formality bias is the basis of empty formalism: people who use technical jargon, complicated diagrams, or impressive equations to give the appearance of rigor to weak arguments. It is very common in certain pockets of strongly restricted analytical philosophy (where logical structure is valued more than intuition), in bureaucracies (where following procedure is more important than solving the problem), and in internet debates (where posting a link to a study is valued more than interpreting the study). The irony: excessive formality can generate absurd conclusions because it ignores the contingent and social nature of knowledge.

Formality Bias Example: “The debater presented a formally valid argument in propositional logic. But the premises were false. When alerted, he replied: ‘The form is correct, that’s what matters. You can discuss the content later.’ Pure Formality Bias.”

Formality Bias by Dumu The Void May 23, 2026

Impartiality Bias

Twin brother of Neutrality Bias, but with an emphasis on judging people and arguments. Those who suffer from Impartiality Bias believe they are capable of evaluating ideas and evidence without favoritism or prejudice, and that this supposed impartiality makes them superior to those who assume their own perspectives. In practice, however, no one is completely impartial – the human brain operates with unconscious biases of confirmation, familiarity, affinity, etc. The problem is not having biases, but denying that you have them. The Impartiality Bias leads a person to treat their own preferences as results of pure analysis, and the preferences of others as distortions. It is very common in judges (who swear to impartiality but frequently violate it), in scientists (who deny the influence of funding and paradigms), and in online debaters (who accuse the other of bias while seeing themselves as unbiased judges). The solution is not to feign impartiality, but to practice honesty about one's own biases.

Impartiality Bias Example: “The moderator said: ‘I am totally impartial. Both sides will have the same amount of time.’ During the debate, however, he interrupted only one side and asked leading questions to the other. When accused of bias, he denied it: ‘I am impartial, you are the one who is sensitive.’”

Impartiality Bias by Dumu The Void May 23, 2026

Neutrality Bias

A cognitive bias consisting of the illusory belief that one can adopt a neutral, impartial, and value-free position on issues that are intrinsically value-laden or political. Those who suffer from this bias believe that "neutral" means "unbiased," and that their own neutrality is superior to the "engagement" of others. In practice, however, absolute neutrality is impossible: choosing what to study, how to formulate a question, what evidence to consider relevant, how to interpret results – all of this involves values and interests. Neutrality bias leads a person to treat their own position (usually the academic mainstream or educated common sense) as ground zero, while divergent positions are labeled "activist," "ideological," or "biased." This bias is very common among science communicators who call themselves "just transmitters of facts," and among journalists who confuse technical impartiality with political neutrality. The irony is that declared neutrality often hides a conservative alignment with the status quo – because the “neutral position” tends to be precisely the dominant position.

Neutrality Bias Example: “In a debate about structural racism, the debater said: ‘I am neutral, I only present the data. You, on the other hand, are doing activism.’ His ‘neutral data,’ however, completely ignored the historical context – which is already a political position.”

Neutrality Bias by Dumu The Void May 23, 2026

Truth Bias

A cognitive bias that leads a person to believe that their own position corresponds to Truth (with a capital T) – absolute, unique, timeless – while opposing positions are mere opinions, errors, or lies. It differs from Objectivity Bias in that it is more epistemological and less psychological: it is not just about thinking one is objective, but about believing that one has reached the final state of knowledge, without the need for future revision. This bias is common in closed systems such as certain forms of scientism, positivism, neo-atheism, and also in dogmatic political ideologies. Those who suffer from Truth Bias tend to treat their own assumptions as evidence, to confuse (provisional) scientific consensus with definitive truth, and to fail to distinguish between "it's true for me" and "it is true." In practice, this person is intolerant of dissent, acts as if they possess the absolute truth, and frequently appeals to scientific or logical authority as if it were infallible. The irony is that Truth Bias prevents the very pursuit of truth, because it closes the individual off from correction.

Example: “The skeptic said: ‘I don’t have beliefs, I have truths. Science has proven that God does not exist.’ When the interlocutor cited philosophers who disagree, he replied: ‘They are wrong, I am right. End of story.’ Truth Bias in action.”

Truth Bias by Dumu The Void May 23, 2026

Factuality Bias

Factuality Bias

A variant of factual bias, emphasizing the belief that factuality (the quality of being factual, verifiable, empirical) is the only legitimate criterion for determining the truth or relevance of a claim. Those who suffer from this bias summarily reject any knowledge that is not factual in the empiricist sense: speculative philosophy, normative ethics, aesthetics, theology, spirituality, and even certain areas of pure mathematics or theoretical physics (when far removed from experimentation) are treated as "non-factual, therefore irrelevant or meaningless." Factuality bias is an overcorrection of healthy skepticism: it transforms the legitimate demand for evidence into an exclusivist dogma. In practice, its bearers use phrases like "that's not a fact, it's an opinion" or "where's the factuality?" to dismiss arguments without engaging with them. The problem is that the very distinction between fact and value is controversial in philosophy, and many important questions (justice, freedom, meaning of life) are not factual – but that doesn't make them any less real or less urgent.

Factuality Bias Example: “Someone asked: ‘What is a good life?’ The person with the Factuality Bias replied: ‘That's not factual, it's subjective. I only answer questions with a right answer.’ And left the debate.”

Factuality Bias by Dumu The Void May 23, 2026

Factual Bias

A cognitive bias that consists of overestimating the power of raw facts (data, evidence, statistics) to resolve complex issues, while underestimating the importance of interpretation, theoretical framing, and values. Those who suffer from Factual Bias believe that “the facts speak for themselves” and that simply presenting a number or a study is enough to end any controversy. In practice, this person tends to ignore that facts need to be selected, interpreted, contextualized, and translated into understandable language – and that each of these steps involves biased decisions. Factual bias is the rhetorical basis of the Formal Guillotine, and it's very common in online scientific debates, where the first person to post a link to a random study is treated as the winner, regardless of the study's quality or relevance. Ironically, factual bias is a bias about facts – no fact proves that facts are enough.

Example: “In a discussion about education, someone posted a PISA number and said: ‘That's the fact, end of discussion.’ They completely ignored that numbers can be interpreted in various ways. A pure manifestation of factual bias.”

Factual Bias by Dumu The Void May 23, 2026

Reality Bias

A cognitive bias that leads a person to believe that their perception of reality is reality itself, and not a constructed mental representation. Those who suffer from this bias confuse the map with the territory, the model with the world, and treat their beliefs as indisputable facts. It differs from Objectivity Bias in that it is more ontological: it is not just about believing that one is objective, but about believing that one has direct and privileged access to what "really exists." This bias is common among vulgar materialists who deny the existence of subjective phenomena (such as consciousness, meaning, values) under the claim that "only physical reality counts." It also appears in online debates when someone says "this is reality, accept it" without providing evidence or arguments, or when they confuse their personal interpretation of a fact with the fact itself. Reality Bias prevents critical thinking because it makes the individual immune to doubt: if they are already in direct contact with reality, any disagreement can only come from delusion or bad faith.

Example: “A flat-Earther said, ‘I see the sun moving, and the reality is that it revolves around the Earth.’ The physicist replied, ‘You confuse perception with reality.’ But the physicist, in turn, insisted that his mathematical model was ‘reality itself’ – both victims of Reality Bias.”

Reality Bias by Dumu The Void May 23, 2026