Choice of action should hinge on what will actually happen, not ideal possibilities

Evidence

Possibilism says that the best possible thing for Procrastinate to do is to accept the review and write it on time. This begins with accepting it, and so he should accept. … Actualism takes a more pragmatic view. By its lights, accepting the review inevitably results in a bad outcome: no review at all. Declining the review means a comparatively better outcome: a review by a slightly less well-qualified reviewer. The professor should do the thing that actually results in the best outcome; hence he should say no. — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1018

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the possibilism/actualism distinction through the Professor Procrastinate thought experiment.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1018
• XREF: connects to: An agent should plan around its own future errors, not ideal execution — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1031; Optimal action under ideal assumptions can be useless under real conditions — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1033; The precautionary principle should override demands for exhaustive proof before acting — Harriet A. Washington, A Terrible Thing to Waste, 1032 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• The precautionary principle should override demands for exhaustive proof before acting #contradicts (0.70) — Harriet A. Washington, A Terrible Thing to Waste, 1032