To clarify, the general approach outlined here doesn’t rest on the use of discount rates — that’s just a simple and illustrative example of scope-restriction.
Right, but the same point applies to other scope-restricted views, no? We need some non-arbitrary answer as to why we limit the scope to some set of consequences rather than a larger or smaller set. (I do think bracketing is a relatively promising direction for such a non-arbitrary answer, to be clear.)
To clarify, the general approach outlined here doesn’t rest on the use of discount rates — that’s just a simple and illustrative example of scope-restriction.
Right, but the same point applies to other scope-restricted views, no? We need some non-arbitrary answer as to why we limit the scope to some set of consequences rather than a larger or smaller set. (I do think bracketing is a relatively promising direction for such a non-arbitrary answer, to be clear.)