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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that JNA (Justification Norm of Assertion) is preferable to KNA as a norm of assertion

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 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 for 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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