5.1 Torn Decisions: In order to respond to the luck argument, it’s important for libertarians to focus on decisions of the right kind--namely, what I have elsewhere called torn decisions. The notion of a torn decision can be defined as follows: A torn decision is a decision in which the person in question has reasons for multiple options, feels torn as to which option is best (and has no conscious belief as to which option is best), and decides without resolving the conflict, i.e., decides while feeling torn. I think we make decisions like this several times a day about things like whether to have eggs or cereal for breakfast, or whether to work out before leaving for work, or whatever. But we can also make torn decisions in connection with big life-changing decisions; e.g., you might have a good job offer in a city you don’t like, and you might have a deadline that forces you to decide while feeling utterly torn. Torn decisions should be distinguished from three other kinds of decisions. First, they should be distinguished from leaning decisions; these are decisions in which the agent chooses while leaning toward one of her live options, whereas in a torn decision, the agent feels completely torn. Second, torn decisions should be distinguished from Buridan’s-ass decisions; these are similar to torn decisions except that the various tied-for-best options are more or less indistinguishable, and because of this, the agent doesn’t feel torn. (E.g., if you want a can of tomato soup, and there are ten cans of the same kind on the shelf, you won’t feel torn--you’ll just grab one and be on your way.) Third, torn decisions should be distinguished from what Kane (1996) calls self-forming actions, or SFAs. The most important difference here is that, unlike SFAs, torn decisions are not defined as being undetermined.
5.1 Torn Decisions: In order to respond to the luck argument, it’s important for libertarians to focus on decisions of the right kind--namely, what I have elsewhere called torn decisions. The notion of a torn decision can be defined as follows: A torn decision is a decision in which the person in question has reasons for multiple options, feels torn as to which option is best (and has no conscious belief as to which option is best), and decides without resolving the conflict, i.e., decides while feeling torn. I think we make decisions like this several times a day about things like whether to have eggs or cereal for breakfast, or whether to work out before leaving for work, or whatever. But we can also make torn decisions in connection with big life-changing decisions; e.g., you might have a good job offer in a city you don’t like, and you might have a deadline that forces you to decide while feeling utterly torn. Torn decisions should be distinguished from three other kinds of decisions. First, they should be distinguished from leaning decisions; these are decisions in which the agent chooses while leaning toward one of her live options, whereas in a torn decision, the agent feels completely torn. Second, torn decisions should be distinguished from Buridan’s-ass decisions; these are similar to torn decisions except that the various tied-for-best options are more or less indistinguishable, and because of this, the agent doesn’t feel torn. (E.g., if you want a can of tomato soup, and there are ten cans of the same kind on the shelf, you won’t feel torn--you’ll just grab one and be on your way.) Third, torn decisions should be distinguished from what Kane (1996) calls self-forming actions, or SFAs. The most important difference here is that, unlike SFAs, torn decisions are not defined as being undetermined.