In "Funes the Memorius," Jorge Luis Borges tells the tale of an Argentinian man who falls off a horse, becomes paralyzed, and acquires the strange gift of infinite memory (Borges, 1993). Funes remembers everything, which is to say he forgets nothing. The author will use Borges's story as the backdrop for his response to Professor Selwyn's critique of learning analytics (Selwyn, 2019). This commentary is in three parts. First, the author begins by stating areas of agreement. Second, the author examines Selwyn's use of the word "data." The author argues that it perpetuates a number of common misconceptions about statistics and the scientific method. People cannot understand the importance of learning analytics without first clarifying these misconceptions and moving beyond them. In the course of his argument, the author challenges Selwyn's central thesis that "Education is inherently social, inherently contextual, inherently subjective; it means you can't objectively rate it, measure it, indicate it." Third, the author turns the tables on Selwyn. As a critic of learning analytics, Selwyn suggests that data "disadvantages large numbers of people" (Selwyn, 2019, p. 6). The author argues that the root problem in education is the status quo, which Selwyn unwittingly represents, and not learning analytics. If the equity in education is cared about, as part of a broader interest in social justice, then learning analytics and the use of educational data can be a powerful instrument for empowering the disadvantaged. [For "What's the Problem with Learning Analytics?" (Selwyn, 2019), see EJ1237568.]