 Price (2001) offers a detailed teleological theory that is similar to Millikan’s. She defends Millikan’s interpretation of the mind of the kimu on the ground that it better explains their behavior (Price 2001, 113–115). She endorses the idea that the point of making content ascriptions is to rationalize behavior (as proposed, e.g., by Davidson 1984 and Dennett 1987), and her claim is that a desire to avoid snorf is a better reason to climb to the top of the hill than a desire to see red. Different responses are possible. First, one could argue that a desire to see red is reason enough to climb a hill. Secondly, one could also question whether it is the role of content ascriptions to rationalize behavior, or whether this is the crucial role in the context in question.