Brogan + Evie

A relationship that will last forever. <3

person 1: "yo have u seen Brogan + Evie recently? aren't they perfect for each other?"
person 2: " yes they are!"

by lover2399 June 27, 2023

L.A.C ELITE

Known by many as the greatest and most diverse basketball team ever. The Los Angeles Lakers played this team in 2028 and loss the 4th game ( the eventual game that would send the team home from the western confrence finals)298-44. The greatest team ever with, as many regard, the best coach ever " Coach J". Projected to save world pollution from ending the world and feeding all the starving african children

L.A.C ELITE is the best team of all time

by THEGOATTTTT August 30, 2023

Quinn and Evie

A couple that is generally characterized by:
-short latina and tall irishman
-long relationship
-generous amounts of PDA
-girl who despises meat
-guy who only eats meat
-cardiobunny girl
-gymrat guy
-girl builds the entire lego, guy gives emotional support

“How long have Quinn and Evie been together?”
“I think a full year now”
“Wow, they are just the perfect couple!😉”

by bestrelationships January 14, 2024

Proof by lack of evidence

The proof by lack of evidence fallacy is claiming something is true simply because nobody has yet given any evidence to the contrary.

Torturer: You are a heretic! You can't prove that you aren't one, so you are a heratic. Confess, or we will stretch your body out until you are a foot taller.

Accused: Ha, you did it - you committed the proof by lack of evidence fallacy!

Torturer: That's enough out of you. Brutus, give the wheel another turn.

by DonutLoverr May 28, 2024

Hard Problem of Evidence

The interpretive gap: Evidence is never self-interpreting; it is always filtered through a prior framework of beliefs, theories, and assumptions (a "paradigm"). A single piece of data can be used to support wildly different conclusions. The hard problem is that there is no such thing as "raw" or "theory-neutral" evidence. What counts as evidence, and how much weight it carries, is determined by the very worldview it is meant to test. This creates a hermeneutic circle where beliefs shape the evidence, which then selectively confirms beliefs.

Example: Two people see the same rainbow. A physicist sees evidence of refraction and wavelengths. A theologian sees evidence of a divine covenant. A pot of gold enthusiast sees evidence of leprechauns. The photons hitting their retinas are identical. The hard problem: The "evidence" of the rainbow is not in the light, but in the interpretation. In a courtroom, a fingerprint is strong evidence only if you already believe in the reliability of forensic science and the integrity of the chain of custody. Evidence is a conversation, not a commandment. Hard Problem of Evidence.

by Enkigal January 24, 2026

Hard Problem of Scientific Evidence

The problem of underdetermination: For any given body of scientific evidence, there are always multiple, logically possible theories that can explain it equally well. Data alone cannot force us to choose one theory over another; extra-scientific criteria like simplicity, elegance, or compatibility with other established theories (paradigm loyalty) must be used. The hard problem is that these criteria are aesthetic and pragmatic, not purely empirical. Thus, the move from evidence to theory is never a strict logical deduction, but a creative, sometimes subjective, leap.

Example: Centuries of astronomical evidence (planetary motions) could be explained perfectly by either Ptolemy's complex earth-centered model (with epicycles) or Copernicus's simpler sun-centered model. The evidence alone didn't decide. The choice was made based on the principle of parsimony (simplicity), which is a philosophical preference, not a law of nature. Today, the weird results of quantum experiments are explained by both the Copenhagen interpretation and the Many-Worlds interpretation. The evidence fits both; our choice is a matter of metaphysical taste, not evidential compulsion. Hard Problem of Scientific Evidence.

by Enkigal January 24, 2026

Theory of Constructed Evidence

The recognition that evidence is never neutral; it is always interpreted through a lens. A strand of hair is just a biological filament until a detective's theory of the crime constructs it as "evidence of the suspect's presence." A statistical correlation is just a number until an economist's model constructs it as "evidence for market manipulation." The theory comes first and dictates what counts as evidence and what that evidence means.

Example: "In the conspiracy forum, the same government press release was constructed as 'evidence of a cover-up' (because they'd admit that if it were true?) and as 'evidence of their brazen transparency' (to throw us off!). The Theory of Constructed Evidence shows the evidence itself was passive; the opposing theories did all the work."

by Dumu The Void January 30, 2026