Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    JNA (Justification Norm of Assertion) is preferable to KN... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    JNA (Justification Norm of Assertion) is preferable to KNA as a norm of assertion

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A norm of assertion should be able to predict which assertions are appropriate without appeal to independent epistemic standards
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.JNA can predict the appropriateness of unlucky and Gettiered assertions without such independent appeal
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.KNA requires appeal to independent epistemic standards (general rationality) to make the same prediction
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Williamson's argument that justified false belief licenses 'I should assert p' yet also 'p is false' reveals that JNA permits constitutively defective assertions, not merely unlucky ones.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A norm governing an act should track the constitutive aim of that act; since assertion aims at truth via knowledge, justification without knowledge fails to meet this constitutive standard.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore KNA better captures the normative structure of assertion than JNA, even if JNA better handles edge cases like Gettier situations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Knowledge is the norm of assertion because 'I know that p, but p is false' is a Moore-paradoxical contradiction, whereas 'I justifiably believe p, but p is false' is not.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.JNA cannot explain this asymmetry in Moore-paradoxicality without borrowing explanatory resources from KNA, undermining its claimed independence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A norm governing an act should track the constitutive aim of that act; since ass...A norm of assertion should be able to predict which assertions are appropriate w...JNA can predict the appropriateness of unlucky and Gettiered assertions without ...JNA cannot explain this asymmetry in Moore-paradoxicality without borrowing expl...
    +4 moreShow less
    KNA requires appeal to independent epistemic standards (general rationality) to ...Knowledge is the norm of assertion because 'I know that p, but p is false' is a ...Therefore KNA better captures the normative structure of assertion than JNA, eve...Williamson's argument that justified false belief licenses 'I should assert p' y...

    Similar

    The Knowledge Norm of Assertion (KNA) is too strong as a requirement f...82%A norm of assertion should be able to predict which assertions are app...82%By the Knowledge Norm of Assertion (KNA), an assertion is proper only ...82%A norm that forbids intuitively appropriate assertions is incorrect.81%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: assertion
    View source passageHide passage
    Proponents of (KNA) and (TNA) tend to concede that unlucky assertions (and Gettiered assertions) are intuitively appropriate, and that lucky assertions are intuitively inappropriate. Their standard defense strategy is to invoke some distinctions that explain away their incorrect predictions. Williamson (2000: 256–257) suggests that making unlucky and Gettiered assertions is reasonable, and this is why assertions like (32) usually don’t warrant criticism. However, here the prediction that u
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit