A range of new paintings in epistemology employs a perception of normality to offer novel theories of know-how or justification. While such theories are normally marketed as affording specially sturdy epistemic logics, they regularly make great assumptions approximately the historical past perception of normality and its logic. This article takes latest normality-primarily based totally defences of the KK precept as a case take a look at to post such assumptions to scrutiny. After clarifying problems concerning the herbal language use of normality claims, the item isolates some of desire factors concerning the position of contingency, context-sensitivity and similarity in our theorizing with normality. It seems that each weaker and more potent logics of normality may be inspired relying on how such picks are resolved. And but securing logics of normality sturdy sufficient for normality to play its envisaged position in epistemology can also additionally have unwelcome downstream outcomes for the ensuing theories of know-how or justification.