Abstract
This chapter applies the theory of temporal neutrality to past commitments. How do we distinguish irrational sunk cost reasoning from rationally permissible honoring of past plans? The chapter provides a parallel principle to Weak Forecasting called Weak Honoring that explains the difference. Roughly, given full information, it is permissible to choose any option you have not foresworn and will never regret over any option you have foresworn or will regret. The chapter considers alternative solutions to the sunk cost puzzle drawn from Nozick (rational irrationality), Bratman and Holton (commitment), Hurka and Kelly (structuralism), and Korsgaard (integrity). It raises objections for each of these alternative accounts.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
