Diotima: The Marist Undergraduate Philosophy Journal
here, so this case is inconclusive with respect to the overall debate. We will need to
look at further cases to see which interpretation of agent-regret is the better one.
Case 2: Bad Deliberation/ Good Outcome
Luigi the Lottery Winner (with Ouija Board): After consulting his
Ouija board, Luigi decides to spend all his life savings on Powerball tickets.
On the day of the Powerball drawing, Luigi’s numbers remarkably get
pulled and he wins 2.4 billion dollars.
Luigi regrets buying the Powerball tickets. Is his regret fitting? Assuming that
Ouija boards do not have magical powers, regret deontologists will argue that
Luigi’s regret is fitting. The reason is that he made a terribly irrational decision. It
just so happens that he got lucky in the outcome, but this is irrelevant. By
contrast, regret consequentialists will argue that Luigi’s regret is not fitting. The
reason is that his decision to buy the Powerball tickets won him 2.4 billion dollars.
If Luigi regrets his decision, he must wish he had not made it. Why would he wish
that? His decision won him 2.4 billion dollars. Common sense tells us that Luigi
should be glad he bought the tickets. Therefore, common sense supports regret
consequentialism over regret deontology. Luigi shows us something about the
essence of agent-regret: namely, that bad deliberation is not sufficient for regret to
be fitting. This is because bad deliberation was the only negative feature in Luigi’s
story, and it was not enough to make regret fitting. There must be something more
regrettable to be fitting.
Case 3: Good Deliberation/ Bad Outcome
Bitcoin Pizza Guy : On 5/18/10, Laszlo Hanyecz posted on a bitcoin forum
offering anyone 10,000 bitcoins if they would get him a couple of pizzas. On
Volume VI (2023)
43
Made with FlippingBook Annual report maker