That&#x27;s actually up for philosophical debate. For instance, if I were to tell you there might be a fly in your house somewhere, you wouldn&#x27;t consider it unlikely even in the absence of evidence, whereas if I said there was a kangaroo, it would be quite agreeable to accept the null hypothesis because the alternative is very unlikely.<p>IOW, if we accepted absence of evidence as evidence of absence, there&#x27;d be no scientific research. Just because most research thus far has been crappy doesn&#x27;t mean learning styles are bullshit. It intuitively seems, at least, that some people are more visual than others, and some are more capable of abstract thought than others, etc.