Furthermore, the consequences of biting this particular bullet aren’t as severe as cleonid implies. A David Morgan-Mar said:
Sometimes I think of my future self in the third person. And sometimes when I do things I don’t like, but which I know will benefit me in the future, I like to think of that as giving a gift to the person who is “my future self”. I don’t see any benefit right now, but that guy will.
I’m pretty lazy. Given the choice between exercise or sitting in front of a TV or computer, I’ll go for the latter. But I make sure I do some exercise fairly regularly, because I know the future me will be the healthier for it. This is a gift to that guy. I hope he appreciates it.
P.S. To the guy who has exercised regularly for the past few years, yes, I appreciate it. Thanks.
Future-me is relatively nearby—when it comes to the well-being and prosperity of an individual, it is a universally-accepted principle that the first responsibility for this falls upon those closest to the person in question. This is why most children are raised by their parents, rather than a selection of random strangers from across the country.*
Present-me is unusually aware of the needs and desires and circumstances of future-me, and further has an unusually strong degree of control over the development of all three, and further has an unusually strong influence over all three even when not acting with future-me directly in mind.
Either of these would provide strong reasons for present-me to pay particular attention to the plight of future-me.
* Edit 2009-11-12: This is known generally as the principle of subsidiarity.
While those are good reasons, I suggest that the biggest reason is simply that present-me cares about “me”. And “me” is a temporally extended person who includes future-me. There doesn’t seem to be anything particularly irrational about self-concern, any more than there is anything irrational about being a Red Wings fan if you happen to live in Detroit. (Or particularly rational, for that matter.)
Nothing special makes me, me. It is just an illusion, that I am unique and nonrepeatable.
I am just a copy of yesterme.
Furthermore, the consequences of biting this particular bullet aren’t as severe as cleonid implies. A David Morgan-Mar said:
The question is – why send the gift to that particular guy rather than anyone else?
Two reasons spring quickly to mind:
Future-me is relatively nearby—when it comes to the well-being and prosperity of an individual, it is a universally-accepted principle that the first responsibility for this falls upon those closest to the person in question. This is why most children are raised by their parents, rather than a selection of random strangers from across the country.*
Present-me is unusually aware of the needs and desires and circumstances of future-me, and further has an unusually strong degree of control over the development of all three, and further has an unusually strong influence over all three even when not acting with future-me directly in mind.
Either of these would provide strong reasons for present-me to pay particular attention to the plight of future-me.
* Edit 2009-11-12: This is known generally as the principle of subsidiarity.
While those are good reasons, I suggest that the biggest reason is simply that present-me cares about “me”. And “me” is a temporally extended person who includes future-me. There doesn’t seem to be anything particularly irrational about self-concern, any more than there is anything irrational about being a Red Wings fan if you happen to live in Detroit. (Or particularly rational, for that matter.)