希欽斯剃刀是一句認識論哲學剃刀法則，該法則認為舉證責任在於提出理論者，如果提出者舉不出實例對應理論，那麼反駁者進行反駁時也不需要舉出實例。
（頁面存檔備份，存於網際網路檔案館）
這個概念以作家，科普學家，新無神論者克里斯多福·希欽斯命名，致敬了奧卡姆剃刀。[5][6][7]該格言出自希欽斯2007年所著的《神並不偉大:宗教如何毒害了萬物》 。[8][4]它是薩根標準(「超乎平凡的主張，需要有超乎平凡的證據」)的一個更強的，適用於一切主張的法則。
希欽斯的剃刀是對一句拉丁語的改編quod grātīs asseritur, grātīs negātur (「毫無根據的假設可以被毫無根據的反駁」)，這句話在19世紀被人們掛在嘴邊。[9][10]
Oxford Essential Quotations (4 ed.): Facts. Oxford Press. Oxford University Press. [19 June 2019]. （原始內容存檔於2019-09-26）. What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. Christopher Hitchens 1949–2011 English-born American journalist and writer: in Slate Magazine 20 October 2003
McGrattan, Cillian. The Politics of Trauma and Peace-Building: Lessons from Northern Ireland. Abingdon: Routledge. 2016: 2. ISBN 978-1138775183. Antony, Michael. Where’s The Evidence?. Philosophy Now: a magazine of ideas. Issue 78. 2010 [19 June 2019]. （原始內容存檔於2019-09-26）. As Christopher Hitchens is fond of saying, 『what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.』
Hitchens, Christopher. God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything Kindle. Twelve Books. 6 April 2009: 258. ASIN B00287KD4Q. What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. This is even more true when the 『evidence’ eventually offered is so shoddy and self-interested.
Kinsley, Michael. In God, Distrust. The New York Times. 13 May 2007 [19 June 2019]. （原始內容存檔於2019-07-04）. Hitchens is attracted repeatedly to the principle of Occam’s razor
Melchior, Jillian. Inside the Madness at Evergreen State. The Wall Street Journal. 21 September 2017 [19 June 2019]. （原始內容存檔於2019-07-04）. Mr. Coffman cited Christopher Hitchens's variation of Occam's razor: 'What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without' [evidence]
Hitchens, Christopher. God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything Kindle. Twelve Books. 6 April 2009: 119. ASIN B00287KD4Q. [William Ockham] devised a 'principle of economy,' popularly known as 'Ockham’s razor,' which relied for its effect on disposing of unnecessary assumptions and accepting the first sufficient explanation or cause. 'Do not multiply entities beyond necessity.' This principle extends itself. 'Everything which is explained through positing something different from the act of understanding,' he wrote, 'can be explained without positing such a distinct thing.'
Jon R. Stone, The Routledge Dictionary of Latin Quotations (2005), p. 101.
