According to traditional versions of the mental file theory, we should posit mental files—that is, mental representations with containment structure—to explain both rational relations between the attitudes, and the persistence of the attitudes across time. However, Goodman and Gray (2022) offer a revisionary interpretation of the file framework, according to which its explanatory commitments are better presented by positing mental filing, as a process, but not mental files, as mental representations with file structure. Goodman and Gray focus on a certain class of synchronic explanations, but files have also been thought to play an essential diachronic role in the maintenance and update of object-directed thought. This paper has two aims. First, we clarify the aims and commitments of Goodman and Gray (2022). Second, we extend their mental filing view to show how it can account for continued belief, change of mind and persistence of the attitudes in general.
