<p>I investigate the semantics of conditionals with proposition-taking attitude expressions in their consequents. I defend a “face-value” interpretation of non-doxastic versions, arguing that everyone is committed to the truth of such interpretations in circumstances that would otherwise prompt theorists to interpret them in other ways. I do this by arguing from the obvious acceptability of attitude ascriptions with ‘ever’ free relatives. Doxastic conditionals require complicating my account somewhat; I show how to demarcate the class, and then argue that we aren’t committed to the truth of a face-value interpretation of such conditionals. I then provide the details of all the relevant interpretations; one main benefit of my account is that it requires little or no semantic novelty, despite the difficulty of the data I attempt to account for.</p>