 To illustrate the issue, consider Professor Procrastinate again. According to possibilism, Procrastinate is obligated to ⟨agree to review the paper &amp; review the paper⟩ and thus is obligated to ⟨agree to review the paper⟩. However, if Procrastinate were to act on her obligation to ⟨agree to review the paper⟩, she would ⟨not review the paper⟩, thereby bringing about the worst possible outcome. This may not sound so counterintuitive in Professor Procrastinate where the worst outcome isn’t tragic. Yet, this objection has more intuitive force in high-stakes variants. Suppose that no matter what Procrastinate were to intend today, she would freely ⟨not review the paper⟩ if she ⟨agrees to review the paper⟩. Suppose furthermore that if Procrastinate were to ⟨not review the paper⟩, then the student would not receive any job offers and commit suicide. Possibilism still renders the verdict that Procrastinate is obligated to ⟨agree to review the paper⟩ and it renders this verdict no matter how terrible the consequences of ⟨agreeing to review the paper⟩ happen to be. This objection to possibilism may be stated more precisely as follows. 