Shifty Evidence and Shifty Books 
Analysis, forthcoming

Abstract. Are all epistemic notions–including evidence and rational credence—sensitive to practical considerations? A number of philosophers have argued that the answer must be ‘No’, since otherwise rational agents would be susceptible to diachronic dutch books (Greco 2013; Rubin 2015; Schroeder 2018). After unpacking this challenge, I show how it can be resisted by appealing to an analogy between shifting stakes and memory loss. The upshot: pervasive epistemic shiftiness may be tenable after all.

You can find the published version here, and the penultimate version here.