 It is quite natural to think that behavior guided by an (implicit or explicit) rule \(R\) is behavior that can be explained by means of \(R\). More precisely, many philosophers think, the explanation needs to be a reasons-explanation. Therefore, the thought is, there is an “intentional condition” on rule-guidance, requiring, for instance, intentions to follow \(R\) (e.g., Baker &amp; Hacker 1985: 155; Glock 1996a: 325), or some other state of accepting or internalizing \(R\) (Boghossian  2008).[34]