Evidence-Based Bias

The specific bias where one treats "evidence-based" as an automatic warrant for one's position and a automatic disqualifier for others', without actually engaging the quality, relevance, or interpretation of the evidence. Evidence-Based Bias operates when someone says "the evidence supports my view" as a conversation-ender, without acknowledging that evidence is always interpreted, that different evidence can support different conclusions, that evidence alone never dictates policy or values, and that "evidence-based" is often claimed by all sides. It's the bias that turns the legitimate principle of grounding claims in evidence into a rhetorical cudgel.

Example: "He kept saying his position was 'evidence-based' as if that settled everything—pure Evidence-Based Bias, using the word 'evidence' to avoid actually discussing what the evidence showed."

by Dumu The Void March 13, 2026

Evidence-Based Fallacy

A fallacy and metafallacy where scientific evidence is invoked to justify positions that lie outside the proper domain of evidence—particularly bigotry, prejudice, racism, xenophobia, aporophobia (hatred of the poor), and other forms of discrimination. The fallacy operates by claiming that discriminatory policies or attitudes are "supported by evidence" (about crime rates, economic impacts, cultural differences) while ignoring that evidence never dictates values, that statistical patterns don't justify moral judgments, and that using evidence to justify oppression misuses the very concept of evidence. It's a metafallacy because it weaponizes the legitimate authority of science to defend what science cannot possibly justify—treating "evidence-based" as a blank check for any position that can find a supporting statistic, regardless of the values, ethics, and human consequences involved.

Example: "He cited crime statistics to justify housing discrimination—the Evidence-Based Fallacy in full flower, using numbers to launder prejudice while pretending that evidence alone could ever justify treating humans as less than human."

by Dumu The Void March 13, 2026

Evidentialist Fallacy

A fallacy where one insists that only claims supported by scientific evidence (as narrowly defined) can be considered real, true, or worthy of belief—dismissing all other forms of knowledge, experience, and understanding as illusory or meaningless. The Evidentialist Fallacy mistakes one mode of knowing for the only mode of knowing, treating empirical evidence as the sole legitimate path to truth while ignoring that evidence itself rests on philosophical assumptions (like the reliability of perception, the uniformity of nature) that cannot be empirically proven. It's the fallacy behind "if you can't prove it in a lab, it doesn't exist"—a position that would dismiss love, justice, beauty, meaning, and most of what makes life worth living.

Example: "He claimed his friend's depression wasn't 'real' because you couldn't measure it with a blood test—pure Evidentialist Fallacy, mistaking the absence of one kind of evidence for the absence of reality itself."

by Dumu The Void March 13, 2026

Evidence-Based Moralism

A form of moralism where "evidence-based" becomes not a commitment to grounding claims in data but a weapon for dismissing views one dislikes and a badge of personal virtue. The evidence-based moralist treats their own positions as simply "what the evidence shows" and opponents' views as not just wrong but morally suspect—irrational, anti-science, dangerous. Evidence becomes a cudgel rather than a tool, a way of ending conversations rather than advancing them. The moralism lies in using the prestige of "evidence" to launder personal judgments, treating empirical support for one's views as proof of one's virtue, and dismissing those who interpret evidence differently as morally deficient rather than just differently persuaded.

Example: "He didn't argue—he just kept saying his position was 'evidence-based' and hers wasn't, as if that settled everything. Evidence-Based Moralism: using the word 'evidence' to avoid having to provide any."

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal March 14, 2026

Evidence-Based Puritanism

A purity culture within communities that elevate "evidence-based" as the supreme standard of legitimacy, where proper relationship to evidence becomes a test of virtue and belonging. Evidence-based puritanism demands that true members base all claims on approved kinds of evidence (usually quantitative, experimental, published in high-impact journals), treat other forms of knowledge as illegitimate, and maintain the purity of evidentiary standards against contamination by alternative ways of knowing. Members compete to demonstrate their evidentiary rigor, their commitment to "what the evidence shows," their willingness to dismiss anything that doesn't meet their standards. The result is a community that claims to value evidence while being dogmatically closed to the full range of human knowledge, treating "evidence-based" as a club rather than a commitment.

Example: "She cited decades of community experience, and they dismissed it as 'anecdotal'—Evidence-Based Puritanism, where only their kind of evidence counts, and anyone who doesn't have it is simply ignored."

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal March 14, 2026

Exvader

Exvader (noun)
/ɛksˈveɪdər/
A person who intentionally moves outward into the world, venturing beyond the familiar with purpose and determination.

(Origin: From Latin vadere (“to go, advance”) + prefix ex- (“out of, beyond”). Inspired by the contrast with “invader” and “evader.”)

"She quit her corporate job to become an exvader, traveling the world and starting her own business."
Someone who pushes beyond boundaries—physical, intellectual, or societal—to explore new possibilities.
"The greatest innovators are exvaders, never content to stay within the status quo."

by ryancal January 29, 2025

Evidence

There is a difference between not actively having evidence with you and there not being any evidence. And a difference, again, between those 2 thing and hiding evidence deliberately explicitly so you can ask where the evidence is to make a banal point about religious uncertainty.

Hym "Additionally, if I say "I have evidence in a safe under my bed' and you refuse to check the safe and prevent me from opening the safe... That is ALSO not the absence of evidence. But your Jew ancestors did lie. They did not talk to the creator of the universe at any point in time. If God exists and it has fore-knowledge... Talking to the people you created would be akin to talking to movie you've already watched."

by Hym Iam March 30, 2025