← The collection

Non-Identity Problem.

Change whether a policy affects the same future person or who comes to exist.

Interactive experimentintuitiveField note ·
INTERACTIVE EXPERIMENT / P68

Non-Identity Problem

Change whether a policy affects the same future person or who comes to exist.

CONSIDER & COMPARE

Two fictional policies change a future life. A fast polluting policy yields a positive well-being index of 40; a delayed clean policy yields 80. Ask whether the same person exists under both policies.

Policy-dependent identities and outcomes
PolicyFuture individualWell-being index
Fast / pollutingA40
Delayed / cleanB80
Your policy judgment

With different individuals, A is not depicted as having an alternative life at 80. That complicates a simple worse-off comparison without establishing that the fast policy is permissible.

These invented positive indices omit rights, distribution and effects on existing people. The non-identity problem does not imply that any life worth living justifies every policy creating it.

Welfare indices are invented and positive. Rights, effects on existing people and distribution are omitted; lack of a worse-off identical person does not establish permissibility.

THE SHORT VERSION

Non-Identity Problem, explained.

The non-identity problem concerns evaluating actions that influence both future welfare and the identities of the people who will exist.

01 / THE MECHANISM

Why it happens

A fast policy gives A a positive welfare index forty; a delayed policy gives eighty either to A or to a different person B. Switching identities changes the availability of a simple person-level counterfactual comparison.

The non-identity problem concerns evaluating actions that influence both future welfare and the identities of the people who will exist.

Read the result

Compare the identity labels before making a worse-off claim. Positive welfare in one row does not by itself establish that a policy is permissible.

02 / FOLLOW IT THROUGH

A worked example

Change who exists under the alternative policy

  1. Inspect the same-person mode, where A has welfare forty or eighty under the two policies.

  2. Switch to different people so the cleaner policy brings B rather than A into existence.

  3. Identify why A’s counterfactual life at eighty is no longer supplied, while ethical questions about the policies remain.

OPTIONAL DEEPER DETAILGo deeper: inside the model

Inside this model

A fast policy gives A a positive welfare index forty; a delayed policy gives eighty either to A or to a different person B. Switching identities changes the availability of a simple person-level counterfactual comparison.

03 / BEYOND THE EXPERIMENT

Where this idea is useful

A practical use

Separate improving an existing person’s possible future from comparing policies that create different future people.

CHECK YOUR INTUITION

A common misconception

THE TEMPTING CONCLUSION

“If a different person would exist, every identity-affecting policy is justified.”

THE MORE USEFUL DISTINCTION

A missing simple person-level harm comparison does not settle rights, distribution or broader obligations to future people.

What this explanation leaves out

  • Welfare indices are invented and positive. Rights, effects on existing people and distribution are omitted; lack of a worse-off identical person does not establish permissibility.
ONE MORE QUESTION

Are forty and eighty empirical measures of possible lives?

No. They are positive invented indices used to expose an identity-dependent comparison, not measurements or policy forecasts.

TAKE THE IDEA WITH YOU

Does the counterfactual change someone’s life or change which person has a life?

Associated thinkers

Associated withDerek Parfit ↗

Associations marked provisional are awaiting source review.

Further reading

Explore the original research or the teaching reference behind this experiment.