Thanks! But to clarify, what I’m wondering is: why take unrealized probabilities to create ex post complaints at all? On an alternative conception, you have an ex post complaint if something bad actually happens to you, and not otherwise.
(I’m guessing it’s because it would mean that we cannot know what ex post complaints people have until literally after the fact, whereas you’re wanting a form of “ex post” contractualism that is still capable of being action-guiding—is that right?)
Your guess is precisely right. Ex-post evaluations have really developed as an alternative to ex-ante approaches to decision-making under risk. Waiting until the outcome realises does not help us make decisions. Thinking about how we can justify ourselves depending on the various outcomes we know could realise does help us.
The name can definitely be misleading, I see how it can pull people into debates about retrospective claims and objective/subjective permissibility.
Thanks! But to clarify, what I’m wondering is: why take unrealized probabilities to create ex post complaints at all? On an alternative conception, you have an ex post complaint if something bad actually happens to you, and not otherwise.
(I’m guessing it’s because it would mean that we cannot know what ex post complaints people have until literally after the fact, whereas you’re wanting a form of “ex post” contractualism that is still capable of being action-guiding—is that right?)
Your guess is precisely right. Ex-post evaluations have really developed as an alternative to ex-ante approaches to decision-making under risk. Waiting until the outcome realises does not help us make decisions. Thinking about how we can justify ourselves depending on the various outcomes we know could realise does help us.
The name can definitely be misleading, I see how it can pull people into debates about retrospective claims and objective/subjective permissibility.
Sorry I edited this as I had another thought.