epistemology-knowledge-types

To determine evidence standards, you classify the knowledge type behind the claim. This process identifies whether the claim is a priori or a posteriori, traces its source to perception or inference, and specifies what evidence requirements apply to validate it.

Type confusion in claim evaluation occurs when reasoning errors mismatch epistemic categories and justification standards, such as treating empirical claims as obvious by logic. You identify it by auditing the claim source and flagging vulnerabilities in perception, inference, testimony, intuition, or memory.

You distinguish between knowing that, knowing how, and knowing of by classifying whether the claim is propositional, procedural, or based on direct acquaintance. This classification determines the correct justification standards required to evaluate the statement.

Yes, you can use epistemology classification to test claims relying on intuition or testimony. Source-aware evaluation traces the claim's grounding and flags likely vulnerabilities, specifying exactly what can and cannot be established by that specific knowledge category.

You should audit a claim source to prevent reasoning errors when someone says obviously, any reasonable person, or I just know, but you suspect the epistemic category and justification standards are mismatched, leading to type confusion.

The best way to evaluate whether a statement is a priori or a posteriori is to classify the knowledge type behind the claim. This determines whether the claim is reason-based or evidence-based and identifies what type of error would most likely invalidate it.