 Perhaps the most puzzling feature of higher-order evidence is that it seems to obligate agents to ignore or set aside parts of their total evidence. (See Christensen 2010a for an early defense of this idea; others, including Elga (2007), also defend it in the context of disagreement.) Even as Aisha comes to doubt her conclusion about G, her first-order evidence and reasoning is still plainly before her. But she cannot rationally appeal to it in forming her beliefs. If she could, Aisha might argue: