Adam Elga

And that, and the answer to that question, then I think should rule the day when that situation actually happens.

I love that characterization.

I think my opponents would disagree that this view meets that standard, but I think that's the kind of thing everyone's going for.

Well, I think there could be two things going on.

And it's actually a very, this exercise of looking back at what would my past self say, I think it's theoretically valuable, but I also think it's actually a really good practical mental exercise to do because you can diagnose what's going on with your own later favoring of your own views if that's what happens.

So one thing is, it might be

that it was kind of a polite fiction that you really treated the person as a peer in the first place.

And there are a lot of things that could be true of the person.

You think this person's really smart, well-intentioned, blah, blah, blah.

It could have been that all along you thought, yeah, but when it comes down to it, if we disagree, I already was going to think it's more likely that I would be the one who was right.

that could be right.

Another thing that could be is no, you really thought they were just as good as you and antecedently you thought conditional on us disagreeing.

It really is, I think it's really a coin toss about who would be right.

But then when the time comes, maybe irrationally, if my view is right, you end up sticking to yourself.

The thing that I really want to rule out is the idea that

you antecedently thought, oh, it's 50-50.

But then when it actually happens, you think, you know what?

I'm right.

I'm right.

And notice a really weird thing that could happen in this case.