 Another strand within cantian explanations of the phenomenon of imaginative resistance takes the inability on the side of the imaginers to result from a kind of a cognitive mismatch or conflict. Jonathan M. Weinberg and Aaron Meskin offer a solution to the puzzle of imaginative resistance (or as they prefer to call it “the puzzle of imaginative blockage”) on the basis of an empirically informed cognitive model of imagination developed on the basis of Shaun Nichols’ and Stephen Stich’s work on imagination (Nichols &amp; Stich 2000, 2003a, 2003b; Nichols 2004). On this model, imaginative resistance arises from a conflict between different cognitive systems. As elements of our cognitive architecture, Weinberg and Meskin identify a belief-box (containing one’s current beliefs) and an imagination-box (containing one’s current imaginings) and the consistency between them is secured by a mechanism called updater which updates one’s beliefs in the face of new information. Another mechanism is called inputter and it is in charge of putting any content whatsoever in one’s imagination box on the basis of one’s decision to do so. There are also domain-specific processes that interact with both the belief-box and the imagination-box, such as moral judgment system(s). In the case of imaginative resistance, a conflict arises between the inputter and the moral judgment system. Upon encountering the sentence G, while the inputter is putting G into the imagination-box, the moral judgment system imposes an independent moral judgment ~G on the basis of the relevant information provided by the work of fiction. This conflict is noticed by the updater and the newly added G is cancelled out. Therefore, G cannot be held in the imagination-box. 