Abstract

For the most part, the epistemological literature of the last decade assumes that the intuitive variability of proper assertion with practical stakes motivates a sensitivity dilemma. That is, either we embrace a biconditional knowledge norm of assertion, and are forced into knowledge sensitivism, or we stick to our classical invariantist guns, but then the knowledge norm goes out the window, together with all its theoretical benefits. This thesis is in the business of taking a step back; it argues that the sensitivity dilemma is a false dilemma, resting on deontic equivocation: the knowledge norm of assertion, it is argued, is perfectly compatible with classical invariantism. Furthermore, I offer independent reason to believe that, if classical invariantism and the knowledge norm are true, shiftiness in assertability is precisely what we should expect.