Abstract
We argue that the majority of intelligence definitions fail to recognize that
the normative epistemic status of intelligence is knowledge and not an inferior
alternative. We refute the counter-arguments that intelligence ought not to be seen as knowledge because of 1) its action-oriented scope and 2) its future-oriented content. We dismiss the traditional infallibilistic understanding of knowledge and follow David Lewis’ argument, that knowledge is fallible and context-sensitive. Thus, we argue for the importance of developing a methodology by which the entitlement, justification and robustness of claims to intelligence-knowledge can be assessed.
the normative epistemic status of intelligence is knowledge and not an inferior
alternative. We refute the counter-arguments that intelligence ought not to be seen as knowledge because of 1) its action-oriented scope and 2) its future-oriented content. We dismiss the traditional infallibilistic understanding of knowledge and follow David Lewis’ argument, that knowledge is fallible and context-sensitive. Thus, we argue for the importance of developing a methodology by which the entitlement, justification and robustness of claims to intelligence-knowledge can be assessed.
| Originalsprog | Engelsk |
|---|---|
| Tidsskrift | Intelligence and National Security |
| Vol/bind | 28 |
| Udgave nummer | 5 |
| Sider (fra-til) | 694-716 |
| ISSN | 0268-4527 |
| DOI | |
| Status | Udgivet - 2013 |
| Udgivet eksternt | Ja |
Fingeraftryk
Dyk ned i forskningsemnerne om 'The Epistemic Status of Intelligence: An Epistemological Contribution to the Understanding of Intelligence'. Sammen danner de et unikt fingeraftryk.Citationsformater
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver