A normative account of epistemic luck

This paper develops a normative account of epistemic luck, according to which the luckiness of epistemic luck is analyzed in terms of the expectations a subject is entitled to have when she satisfies the standards of epistemic justification. This account enables us to distinguish three types of epistemic luck-bad, good, and sheer-and to model the roles they play e.g. in Gettierization. One controversial aspect of the proposed account is that it is non-reductive. While other approaches analyze epistemic luck in non-epistemic terms-either in modal terms (lack of safety) or in agential terms (lack of creditworthiness)-I argue that the non-reductive nature of the normative account is actually a selling-point relative to its competitors.