 I. J. Good (1967) demonstrated that gathering evidence maximizes expected value given that the cost of the evidence is negligible. Under this simplifying assumption, Good shows that departures from the principle of total evidence is at least imprudent. Given epistemic utilitarianism, this practical irrationality becomes theoretical irrationality. Bob Beddor (2019) now adds the premise that it is irrational to intend to do what one foresees to be irrational. For instance, if you offered a million dollars to drink toxin tomorrow that will make you ill for a day, you could profit from the offer (Kavka 1983). But if the million would be earned immediately upon you intending to drink the toxin, then you could not profit because you know there would be no reason to follow through. By analogy, Beddor concludes that it would be irrational to intend to avoid counterevidence (Beddor 2019, 738). One is never entitled to discard evidence, even after it has been foreseen as misleading evidence.