&gt;<i>There is no such thing as &quot;The SJW position&quot;. No one holds this position. As i said, other people claim that &quot;SJW&quot;s are irrational and reject empirical evidence. It is a word used to smear people by grouping them together in a category of &quot;bad&quot;. There is no &quot;SJW&quot; manifesto or association of &quot;SJW&quot;s.</i><p>A group of people sharing a number of beliefs and behaviors need not be centrally organized or hold <i>all</i> of the same beliefs or <i>all</i> of the same behaviors in order to be correctly reasoned about as a group.<p>Here&#x27;s an example of such a group: &quot;Anti-vaxxers&quot;. People who think, despite all evidence to the contrary, that vaccines are harmful to human life. They parrot misinformation, refuse to engage with good faith criticism, and worse, foster an <i>actual public health crisis</i> because they won&#x27;t get the shots and won&#x27;t let their kids.<p>The individual beliefs aren&#x27;t always identical, or even coherent. Some think the vaccines are a government population control program. Some think that the science isn&#x27;t in yet. Some think that because their friend&#x27;s friend&#x27;s cousin&#x27;s dad&#x27;s son had a bad reaction, that they&#x27;re all harmful. (This addresses the &quot;direct observational evidence&quot; you mentioned, I think.)<p>We still reason about those people as a group based on their actions: Refusing to be vaccinated, refusing to have their kids vaccinated. Should we stop doing so in some attempt to preserve some notion of philosophical&#x2F;empirical purity, some notion of not offending these people, or should we address the health problem and call the willful ignorance what it is?<p>&gt;<i>What people who use the term &quot;SJW&quot; mean when they use it is that someone evaluated the same indirect data in a different way from them</i><p>I can only speak for myself here, but when <i>I</i> use that term, I refer to a brand of authoritarian left-leaning political behavior, one that is hostile to any non-agreement (disagree = blocked), one that actively parrots refuted statistics (wage gap), one that is <i>perfectly okay</i> with hateful behavior as long as it&#x27;s directed at someone &quot;more advantaged&quot; than them.<p>In other words, more actions than thoughts - but every action has a motivating thought.