If an epistemic justification for special obligations relies on superior knowledge of particular needs, that justification evaporates when impartial methods demonstrably achieve better outcomes.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Evaporates(describing what happens to an argument when circumstances change): In this context, means the justification disappears or loses its strength; it's no longer a good reason to believe something.
epistemic justification(Cresto's framing of the justification condition she argues is not always necessary): A condition for knowledge that can be understood either in internalist or externalist terms
impartial(as a requirement for moral actions): Treating everyone fairly without favoring some people over others; not biased toward particular individuals or groups.
knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.): Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

Based on where you are in your exploration