In this paper, I argue against certain positive epistemic norms, that is, norms that state sufficient conditions for being obligated to believe something. In particular, I argue against positive epistemic norms where the sufficient conditions involve being in a position to know. Such norms face two kinds of problems: they make demands that exceed our cognitive capacity, and they yield obligations and permissions to believe that seem irrational.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thomas Kroedel (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: