Abstract: Transformative decisions are almost always framed as a problem for decision theory. However, it seems that the problem has no real bite when presented in this way – there are many ways it can be avoided, and most don’t incur significant costs. For example, the problem only arises on a specific (nonstandard) conception of decision theory, and even then, it only then becomes a problem if we accept the requirement that outcomes must be evaluated from the subjective perspective. I think transformative decisions are misconstrued as a problem for decision theory. Paul’s argument is (or should be) that transformative decisions can be made rationally, but only at the cost of authenticity. The problem of transformative experience is more accurately described as a dilemma between rationality and authenticity. Currently, the dilemma is under-explored and ill-motivated. I will argue that a conflict between authenticity and rationality in transformative decision-making arises when we take the commitments that transformative decisions involve seriously.

Hybrid talk. Room: School V.