Q: When is justification required for a perspective?

I am familiar with three answers to this question, but would like to explore other options. Those I am familiar with are below.

1. Any claim must be justified.
   
2. Any positive claim must be justified.
   
3. Only certain claims must be justified.
   

What are some other options? Or is the 'correct' answer listed above? (Or, have I completely botched the question?:perplexed:)

Uncertain claims can be a matter of faith..is that a natural progression? Claims can be personal..claims need a witness...no claims can be proven completely..As a non educated philosopher am i playing the game correctly?

I am not sure that I follow what you're getting at.

Then one of us has failed..