4 Comments

Thanks for this! Three main thoughts:

(1) What counts as a "big decision"? I say: one on which *distinct* big values are in conflict. It's not enough to just have big value involved. You shouldn't feel deeply torn about whether to claim a $1 billion prize in $100 bills or in $20 bills. As you say, these are "functionally identical" -- but that sounds like just another word for *fungible*, i.e. making no difference that it makes sense to care about.

So there is clearly a distinction to be drawn between equal-valued choices that make no difference worth caring about, vs. equal-valued choices that *are* meaningfully different. And that's just what I'm trying to capture.

(2) I agree that equal-valued choices within a life can be meaningfully different. And this isn't limited to timeslices. We may hold that different types of pleasure, or different types of objective value, warrant valuing "separately" from each other in this way. That's not an objection to my view, but an application of it.

(3) Parfit's deflationary view of identity is compatible with seeing something in the vicinity (e.g. "relation R" / psychological continuity) as having much the same significance as we ordinarily attribute to identity. See: https://rychappell.substack.com/i/56234504/does-anything-matter-in-survival

Expand full comment