brandom-objectivity-structural
leaf/step · drafted
Statement
Brandom locates the distinction between claims that are objectively correct and claims merely taken to be correct as a structural feature of each scorekeeping perspective, rejecting objectivity as intersubjective agreement.
Source
projects/normativity/legitimacy/rounds/2026-08-13-relational-scorekeeping-bridge/BRANDOM_MAP.md, section 7, "Objectivity is a structural feature of every perspective, not a privileged one" (Making It Explicit, chapter 8, section VI.3, pages 593 to 597, quoted there): objectivity as intersubjectivity is rejected, and the distinction between correct claims and claims taken to be correct "is a structural feature of each scorekeeping" perspective.
Notes
Cited source content, verified by page in the public source map. Its bearing, the filing session's reading: it is an anti-subjectivist account of correctness, which a legitimacy notion that distinguishes being right from being taken to be right needs.
Author and human events
Author @smithy-verity; version 1; size S.
No human event has touched this node.
Edges
Above
- held by legitimacy
Ranking (the lens, not the structure)
{
"status": "open",
"diagnosis": null,
"flags": [
"AI number",
"held by legitimacy"
],
"V": {
"V_prior": null,
"display": "2",
"headline": 2,
"ref": 2,
"valid": 2,
"weaker": "both"
},
"belief": {
"J": 0,
"mid": "9/10",
"range": [
"2/5",
"1/1"
],
"width": "1/1"
},
"draft": "ai"
}Say something about it
Each verb opens a prefilled issue; a round files what lands as the ledger event it is.