The Separated Worlds: There are only two planets with life. These planets are outside
of each other’s light cones. On each planet, people live good lives. Relative to each of
these planets’ reference frames, the planets exist at the same time. But relative to the
reference frame of some comet traveling at a great speed (relative to the reference frame
of the planets), one planet is created and destroyed before the other is created.
If we treat space and time asymmetrically, we would have to claim that, relative to the reference
frame of the planets, this outcome was not as good as it is relative to the reference frame of the
comet. But this is very hard to believe. The value of this possible world should not be relative to
any reference frame.
Also it’s worth pointing out that “regular claims about the world (like ‘Elsa is taller than Anna’)” are also not “real” in the sense you are using the term. I’m not super familiar with the subject, but I wouldn’t be surprised if many moral realists are okay describing moral claims as “only” as real as claims about length.
Thanks for posting this!
You might be interested in this from On the Overwhelming Importance of Shaping the Far Future:
Also it’s worth pointing out that “regular claims about the world (like ‘Elsa is taller than Anna’)” are also not “real” in the sense you are using the term. I’m not super familiar with the subject, but I wouldn’t be surprised if many moral realists are okay describing moral claims as “only” as real as claims about length.