10 We should stress that it is not a disaster if Sosa accepts (10’’), the claim that your counterpart has propositional justification for B at t. What Sosa needs to do is to avoid commitment to a contradiction concerning either doxastic justification or propositional justification, and we think that we have shown, contra Vogel, how to do this. An editor of this journal suggested that Sosa should not countenance (10’’), since its defense in the text, in effect, had Sosa allowing a justified status for a reliability belief that could figure in an inference involving CT (one that in fact does not occur in the version of the case considered in the text in the discussion of propositional justification). After all, said the editor, your counterpart has no memories to justify a conclusion of the reliability of B's source. If Sosa were to follow this path, there would still be no obvious way of sticking him with a contradiction regarding propositional justification.