Abstract
Potential perspectivism is the view that what an agent ought to do (believe, like, fear, . . . ) depends primarily on facts that are potentially available to her. I consider a challenge to this view. Potentially accessible facts do not always agglomerate over conjunction. This implies that one can fail to have relevant access to a set of facts as a whole but have access to proper subsets of it, each of which can support different incompatible responses. I argue that potential perspectivism has no unproblematic answer to the question of what the agent ought to do (believe, like, fear, . . . ) in such circumstances.