Choice Points for a Theory of Normality

Abstract A variety of recent work in epistemology employs a notion normality to provide novel theories knowledge or justification. While such are commonly advertised as affording particularly strong epistemic logics, they often make substantive assumptions about the background and its logic. This article takes normality-based defences KK principle case study submit scrutiny. After clarifying issues regarding natural language use claims, isolates number choice points role contingency, context-sensitivity similarity our theorizing with normality. It turns out that both weaker stronger logics can be motivated depending on how choices resolved. And yet securing enough for play envisaged may have unwelcome downstream consequences resultant