Unevaluatable vs. Unevaluable — What's the Difference?

Unevaluatable is typically used when an item or situation is too complex, ambiguous, or variable to assess accurately. For instance, abstract concepts or highly subjective matters may be deemed unevaluatable. Whereas, unevaluable describes items or situations that fundamentally cannot be evaluated because they do not meet the necessary criteria or standards for assessment. This term is less about complexity and more about the absence of measurable attributes.

Unevaluatable may apply to scenarios where traditional metrics or methods fail to provide a meaningful assessment, such as evaluating an artist’s impact on culture. On the other hand, unevaluable might be used to describe something like beauty, where the inherent subjectivity precludes a standard evaluation.

In some contexts, unevaluatable is used to express the temporary inability to evaluate due to missing data or an evolving situation. Meanwhile, unevaluable suggests a permanent state where evaluation is not just currently impossible but fundamentally inappropriate or unfeasible.

In the field of research, a hypothesis could be considered unevaluatable if it cannot be tested with existing scientific methods or technologies. Conversely, a hypothesis might be unevaluable if it does not formulate a testable prediction at all, thus lacking one of the basic criteria for scientific inquiry.

While both terms share a root in evaluation, they diverge in their application based on the reasons behind why an evaluation cannot be conducted. Unevaluatable often leaves room for future possibility of evaluation, assuming changes in circumstances or advancements in methodology. In contrast, something described as unevaluable typically suggests a more definitive impossibility of assessment.