 There remain some disputes about how to understand the DBA for probabilism, and whether it provides an appropriate defense for the claim.  As discussed, some take the DBA to show that the probability axioms are a condition of consistency for action guiding degrees of belief, where having incoherent credences involves faulty evaluations of options.  It is sometimes added that incoherence thus indicates a form of epistemic irrationality.  Although incoherence may be held to depart from a certain ideal of rationality in this way, it need not mean that it is, all things considered, irrational to violate the probability axioms, as noted by Huttegger (2013).  On this understanding, the claim that violating the probability axioms is a form of irrationality proceeds from the claim of inconsistency.  