Parfit's argument in Reasons and Persons shows that future-Tuesday indifference and other structurally coherent but substantively irrational desires satisfy desire-satisfaction criteria while generating absurd normative verdicts.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Desire-satisfaction criteria(as an ethical standard being examined): A theory of well-being saying that a life is good to the extent that a person's desires get fulfilled.
Future-Tuesday indifference(as an example of an irrational desire): A thought experiment where someone cares about their well-being on all days except Tuesday—a silly preference that shows how absurd some logical positions can be.
Normative verdicts(as the judgments that lead to absurd conclusions): Conclusions about how people *should* act or what is right and wrong (as opposed to just describing what people do).
Parfit: Derek Parfit was a highly influential British philosopher known for revolutionizing how we think about personal identity, morality, and what makes life worth living. He argued that our sense of being a continuous, unified "self" is partly an illusion, and that what really matters is the continuation of our thoughts and experiences, not some invisible thread connecting us through time. His ideas have shaped modern ethics and how philosophers approach questions about identity, responsibility, and how we should treat future generations.

Based on where you are in your exploration