Exploring Arbitrariness Objections to Time-Biases

Journal of the American Philosophical Association (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There are two kinds of time-bias: near-bias and future-bias. While philosophers typically hold that near-bias is rationally impermissible, many hold that future-bias is rationally permissible. Call this normative hybridism. According to arbitrariness objections, certain patterns of preference are rationally impermissible because they are arbitrary. While arbitrariness objections have been levelled against both near-bias and future-bias, the kind of arbitrariness in question has been different. In this paper we investigate whether there are forms of arbitrariness that are common to both kinds of preferences, and hence whether there are versions of the arbitrariness objection that are objections both to near-bias and future-bias. If there are, then this might go some way towards undermining normative hybridism and to defending a thorough-going time-neutralism.

Author Profiles

Andrew James Latham
Aarhus University
Kristie Miller
University of Sydney
Sam Shpall
University of Sydney
1 more

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-11-02

Downloads
163 (#69,713)

6 months
87 (#41,781)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?