My take (think I am less of an expert than djbinder here)
This view allows that.
This view allows that. (Although entirely separately consideration of entropy etc would not allow infinite value.)
No I don’t think identical questions arise. Not sure. Skimming the above post it seems to solve most of the problematic examples you give. At any point a moral agent will exist in a universe with finite space and finite time that will tend infinite going forward. So you cannot have infinite starting points so no zones of suffering etc. Also I think you don’t get problems with “welfare-preserving bijections” when well defined it time but struggle to explain why. It seems that for example w1 below is less bad than w2
My take (think I am less of an expert than djbinder here)
This view allows that.
This view allows that. (Although entirely separately consideration of entropy etc would not allow infinite value.)
No I don’t think identical questions arise. Not sure. Skimming the above post it seems to solve most of the problematic examples you give. At any point a moral agent will exist in a universe with finite space and finite time that will tend infinite going forward. So you cannot have infinite starting points so no zones of suffering etc. Also I think you don’t get problems with “welfare-preserving bijections” when well defined it time but struggle to explain why. It seems that for example w1 below is less bad than w2
Time t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t6 t7
Agent a1 a2 a3 a4 a5 a6 a7
w1 −1 −1 −1 −1….
w2 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1….