Theory of Constructed Evidence

The recognition that evidence is not simply found but actively constructed through decisions about what counts, how to measure, what to include, and what to exclude. A footprint is just a mark until someone constructs it as evidence. A data point is just a number until someone constructs it as significant. The Theory of Constructed Evidence studies these construction processes: the instruments that produce evidence, the criteria that select it, the narratives that frame it, the power relations that determine whose evidence counts.

"You keep pointing to 'the evidence' as if it's just lying there. Theory of Constructed Evidence says: someone decided what to measure, how to measure it, what threshold counts as significant, what to publish, what to exclude. The evidence is real, but it's also constructed. Know the construction or be deceived by it."

by Dumu The Void February 24, 2026

Appeal to Evidence

A fallacy where someone demands "evidence" in a way that assumes only certain kinds of evidence count, or where "evidence" is invoked as a magic word that ends discussion without specifying what evidence, from where, or why it's convincing. Often used to dismiss personal experience, testimonial knowledge, or qualitative research: "That's just anecdotal—where's the real evidence?" The fallacy lies in treating "evidence" as a unitary thing rather than a spectrum, and in using the demand for evidence as a way to dismiss rather than inquire.

"I shared my experience of discrimination. Response: 'Do you have evidence for that?' They meant: do you have video, documentation, witnesses? My experience wasn't evidence to them. That's Appeal to Evidence—using the word to dismiss what you've already decided doesn't count. Evidence is real; using it as a weapon is not."

by Dumu The Void February 28, 2026

Fallacy of Impossible Evidence

A specific form of impossible burden where the demand is for evidence that cannot exist given the nature of the claim. The fallacy lies in demanding empirical evidence for non-empirical claims, historical evidence for events that left no records, or replicable data for unique phenomena. The demand sounds reasonable—"just show me the evidence"—but functions as dismissal because the evidence requested is, by the nature of the case, unavailable. It's skepticism weaponized as impossibility.

"You claim consciousness survives death? Show me one peer-reviewed study with replicable results." That's Fallacy of Impossible Evidence—demanding scientific evidence for a claim that, if true, might not be scientifically accessible. The demand sounds reasonable; it's actually a conversation-ender dressed as curiosity. Evidence comes in many forms; demanding only the form you know will be absent is not inquiry—it's dismissal."

by Dumu The Void February 28, 2026

Evidence Biases

Systematic distortions in what counts as evidence, how evidence is gathered, and how evidence is weighed. Evidence Biases include: privileging quantitative over qualitative evidence; treating anecdotal evidence as worthless even when it's all that's available; demanding evidence from those who lack power while accepting it from those who have it; ignoring evidence that doesn't fit the frame; collecting evidence only where it's easy or funded. Evidence Biases shape not just what we know but what we can know—what counts as a fact and what gets dismissed as mere anecdote.

Evidence Biases "She shared her experience of discrimination. Response: 'That's just anecdotal—where's the real evidence?' That's Evidence Bias—treating personal testimony as worthless while demanding quantitative studies that don't exist. Experience is evidence; it's just not the kind you're used to. Evidence biases make us miss what's in front of us because it doesn't fit our evidence categories."

by Dumu The Void March 1, 2026

Evidence Metabiases

Second-order biases about evidence—systematic distortions in how we define, value, and interpret evidence. Evidence Metabiases include: treating some forms of evidence (quantitative) as real and others (qualitative, experiential) as anecdotal; assuming more evidence always means better understanding; believing that evidence speaks for itself; ignoring that evidence is always interpreted; using "evidence-based" as a magic phrase that ends discussion. Evidence Metabiases shape what counts as evidence in the first place—and who gets to decide.

Evidence Metabiases "She says her experience isn't evidence because it's 'just anecdotal.' That's Evidence Metabias—having a definition of evidence that excludes most human knowing. Experience is evidence; it's just not the kind that fits in spreadsheets. The metabias is thinking your evidence hierarchy is natural, not constructed."

by Dumu The Void March 1, 2026