Individual skill

s4h-epistemology-knowledge-types

Maps what kind of knowing is actually in play for a claim or question. Distinguishes a priori from a posteriori knowledge; propositional (knowing that) from procedural (knowing how) from acquaintance (knowing of); and knowledge sourced from perception, inference, testimony, intuition, or memory. Use when you say 'what kind of claim is this', 'is this something we can reason our way to or do we need evidence', 'they're treating this as obvious but I don't think it is', 'is this really an empirical question', or when you need to assess what standards of justification apply before testing whether a claim is true.

skills/s4h-epistemology-knowledge-types/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit a30df8b67698ccb03ef5e35d68c2eddc5321ad3f

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
No
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
No
Observed behavior
Not checked yet
Last checked
Nov 11, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
241
Repository last updated
Jul 15, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# Epistemology: Knowledge Types

Before you can test whether a claim is justified, you need to know what kind of claim it is — because different kinds of knowing have different justification standards, different failure modes, and different evidentiary requirements. Mixing up knowledge types is a recurring source of bad reasoning: treating empirical claims as if they're matters of pure logic, treating intuitions as if they're perceptions, treating testimony as if it's first-hand knowledge.

This skill classifies the kind of knowing in play, then draws out what that classification implies for how the claim can be established or challenged.

---

## Your Process

**Step 1: Extract the Claim**
State the claim being made as precisely as possible. Strip away rhetorical packaging. What exactly is being asserted?

**Framing check:** Confirm the specific claim before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual claim being analyzed and the context in which it is being made — in one sentence, then use `AskUserQuestion`:
Back to top