Deliberate action requires partial but not total foresight of consequences
Evidence
If he did not know, to a certain extent, what the consequences of a certain move would be, the game would be impossible; but it would also be impossible if this foresight extended indefinitely. Plato’s definition of the philosopher as he who stands between knowing and not-knowing holds for man in general. The slightest consideration shows how every single step of our life is determined and rendered possible by the fact that we perceive its consequences, and likewise because we perceive them only up to a certain point, beyond which they become confused and finally escape our vision altogether. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 785
Categorization
- DEFINE: Simmel’s account of the knowing/not-knowing boundary: the chess player’s foresight that must be both real and limited for play to be possible.
- XREF: connects to: Choice of action should hinge on what will actually happen, not ideal possibilities — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1018; 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 (+13 more)
Related
- An action is defined by conscious intention, not by its effects (similarity 0.87)
Broader Connections
- Choice of action should hinge on what will actually happen, not ideal possibilities
#qualifies(0.60) — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1018 - Optimal action under ideal assumptions can be useless under real conditions
#complicates(0.60) — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1033 - An agent should plan around its own future errors, not ideal execution
#expands(0.55) — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1031