So, let’s work with the stronger view, according to which we ought to  be instrumentally coherent as such.  One worry about this answer is  “bootstrapping.”  Suppose that this requirement to be instrumentally  coherent as such is stated in “narrow-scope” form: if one intends to E  and believes that one will E only if one intends to M, then one is  required to intend to M.  Now suppose that one intends to stay in power  and believes that one will do so only if one intends to kill one’s  rival.  If one ought to be instrumentally coherent as such, it would  follow that one ought to intend to kill one’s rival.  But that seems  implausible.  So, one may conclude, we cannot understand “one is  rationally required” as implying “one ought.” 