What counts as a good justification for a claim?

Object 1: Tweet by @GothamChess

This tweet by chess International Master Levy

Rozman (@gothamchess) cites an anti-
cheating AI score to justify his claim that the
Indonesian birdseed merchant that beat him
on chess.com was cheating. Though many
refused to believe that the merchant,
@Dewa_Kipas, cheated, Rozman’s claim of
dishonesty was well justified two different
ways.

The first way is through the AI score that

measures a user’s ability to play “perfect”
chess. In some games, this tweet shows,
@Dewa_Kipas played at a near AI level (which is impossible). In other games, he played at lower
levels (games he lost).

The first good justification was made by comparing @Dewa_Kipas to AI. One can make the
assumption that someone who is able to play at an AI skill level wouldn’t, at other times, play like an
amateur. Here, good justification comes from the use of, and faith in, technology and the
understanding that technology is not biased. Additionally, this AI has been vouched for by many of
the top players in the world. The numbers in this tweet are verified by knowledge authorities.

The second good justification occurred as a result of this tweet: @Dewa_Kipas agreed to play an
International Master in person and lost all three games. This also justified Rozman’s claim of
cheating, as the losses were streamed on YouTube to over one million viewers.

Does the AI score (and its expert testimony) and in-person losses prove that @Dewa_Kipas cheated
on the night that he beat Rozman? Absolutely not. But by combining the trust that we have in
technology with the empiricism of watching him lose to player of Rozman’s skill, the justification of
this claim is good. Technology and authority, when combined with personal experience, can lead to
a good justification. There would be room for debate, and thus the justification would not be good,
if there was only an empirical or technologically based claim.

Technology’s lack of bias and instant data-gathering, when combined with personal experience, can
lead knowers to reason a good justification for a claim.