 Because operating in unison requires an absence of task-irrelevant processing, the most straightforward version of the unison theory entails that full attention is a rare achievement, with most cases of attentiveness involving what is, strictly speaking, only partial or divided attention. Mole (like Ribot) accepts this implication. Yair Levy has suggested that doing so prevents him from giving an adequate account of phenomena such a listening, or observing, which always require some attention to be paid, but which can nonetheless be done more or less attentively (Levy, 2019). Work by Philipp Koralus has suggested that a more satisfactory treatment of divided attention can be given if the attentive pursuit of a task is understood to share certain formal properties with the answering of a question (Koralus, 2014). This characterization of attention as “the means by which we answer questions about the environment” has been argued for on phenomenological and epistemological grounds by Naomi Eilan (Eilan, 1998). (Eilan credits the thought to Rowland Stout, whose treatment of it can be found in Chapter 9 §5 of Stout 2006.) Koralus draws on Hamblin’s 1958 semantics of questions to provide a formal model of such questioning (Hamblin, 1958).