This paper attempts to clarify some issues about what is usually called "doxastic voluntarism". This phrase often hides a confusion between two separate (although connected) issues: whether belief is or can be, as a matter of psychological fact, under the control of the will, on the one hand, and whether we can have practical reasons to believe something, or whether our beliefs are subject to any sort of "ought", on the other hand. The first issue is psychological, and I take the answer to be negative. The second issue is normative, and the answer that I give is a qualified 'yes'. Belief is not a matter of the will, although there are certain things that we ought to believe. (edited)