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

Falsifiability Fallacy

A fallacy where one insists that only claims that can be falsified (proven false through empirical testing) can be considered scientific, meaningful, or real—misapplying Karl Popper's demarcation criterion for science as a universal standard for all knowledge. The Falsifiability Fallacy treats "this claim isn't falsifiable" as equivalent to "this claim is meaningless," ignoring that many meaningful claims (historical events, mathematical truths, ethical principles, subjective experiences) aren't falsifiable in Popper's sense. It's the fallacy behind dismissing philosophical questions as "not even wrong" and treating the limits of empirical testing as the limits of reality itself—a profound confusion between a useful criterion for distinguishing science from non-science and a supposed criterion for distinguishing sense from nonsense.

Example: "He dismissed the question of whether love exists as meaningless because it wasn't falsifiable—the Falsifiability Fallacy in action, using a tool for identifying scientific claims as if it were the gatekeeper of all reality."

by Dumu The Void March 13, 2026

Majoritarian Fallacy

A fallacy and metafallacy where one argues that slavery is acceptable if a majority votes for it, that atrocities are justified if a majority supports them, that abuses are legitimate if they have popular backing. The Majoritarian Fallacy confuses descriptive fact (many people want this) with normative justification (this is therefore right)—and worse, uses majority support to immunize atrocities from critique. It's the logic behind "if it was so bad, why did everyone go along with it?" and "democratically elected authoritarianism is still democracy" and "the people have spoken." The fallacy lies in treating majority preference as moral warrant, as if numbers could transmute exploitation into legitimacy, as if counting hands could launder blood. It's a metafallacy because it preemptively delegitimizes critique—challenging the atrocity becomes challenging the people, questioning the majority becomes questioning democracy itself.

Example: "He defended the regime by pointing to election results—as if 51% support made concentration camps acceptable. Pure Majoritarian Fallacy: treating majority preference as if it could sanctify any horror."

by Dumu The Void March 14, 2026

Logarithmic Fallacy

A fallacy in which one interprets growing data as to always be growing.

"Dude, my baby is twice as big in just 3 months, what the hell am I going to do with a 7.5 trillion pound 10 year old?"

"Uhh, logarithmic fallacy, but also like, are you okay man?"

by onedefinitionderrick March 20, 2025

The Fallacy Limit

When someone does so many things wrong and backwards that it reaches a critical mass such that it's a mathematical impossibility to point out a single instant of it in time, and it tries to drag everything into its singularity. Also known as "quantum stupidity".

She reached the fallacy limit for the day . . . and for all time.

by Ubermensch-One March 28, 2025

Maxwell Fallacy

An over reliance on ai and using ai erroneously. Using leading prompts into large language models that generate a desired response and using that response as proof. The worst kind of fallacy there is. Also posting screen shots of this fallacy is double bad.

“That’s a classic Maxwell Fallacy thinking you are right after you finally got ChatPT to agree with you after asking it enough questions! None of us humans are falling for your straw man arguments though.”

by Limousine Liberal April 4, 2025

Maxwell Fallacy

An over reliance on AI and using AI erroneously. Using leading prompts into large language models that generate a desired response and using that response as proof. The worst kind of fallacy there is. Also posting screen shots of this fallacy is double bad

“This is a classic Maxwell Fallacy thinking that you are right just because you asked enough leading questions to get ChatGPT to agree with you! But none of us humans agree with you and we see right past your straw man arguments.”

by Limousine Liberal April 4, 2025