Action A is whatever action is in the first position, and action B in the second, in whatever list of actions we have. When I say, “let’s swap the consequences of A and B”, that’s equivalent to saying “let’s consider a second scenario, that need not have anything else to do with the first one, except that the consequences of the action in the new first entry are identical to those of the second entry of the original scenario (and vice versa), and the number of actions and sets of outcomes stay the same”. We are considering consequentialists, and, by definition, as far as their decisionmaking procedure is concerned, two scenarios where the actions in each entry have identical (uncertain/unaware) consequences are the same scenario. Though, if it helps, you can imagine we have two buttons, labelled A and B, so that swapping their consequences can be achieved by swapping whatever their cables are connected to.
Action A is whatever action is in the first position, and action B in the second, in whatever list of actions we have. When I say, “let’s swap the consequences of A and B”, that’s equivalent to saying “let’s consider a second scenario, that need not have anything else to do with the first one, except that the consequences of the action in the new first entry are identical to those of the second entry of the original scenario (and vice versa), and the number of actions and sets of outcomes stay the same”. We are considering consequentialists, and, by definition, as far as their decisionmaking procedure is concerned, two scenarios where the actions in each entry have identical (uncertain/unaware) consequences are the same scenario. Though, if it helps, you can imagine we have two buttons, labelled A and B, so that swapping their consequences can be achieved by swapping whatever their cables are connected to.
Thank you! That does answer my question, I was assuming it was the same or similar scenario.