Originally the plan was to also analyze optimal timing from an impersonal (xrisk-minimization) perspective; but to prevent the text from ballooning even more, that topic was set aside for future work (which might never get done).
That’s unfortunate. It seem like it would have been better for you to start with the optimal timing analysis from an impersonal perspective since an impersonal perspective seems much more plausible than a person-affecting perspective.
Do you think your analysis of optimal timing from the person-affecting view is useful even if person-affecting views are wrong?
Do you think an analysis of optimal timing from an all-things-considered moral parliamentary perspective that only gives some weight to person-affecting views as appropriate would come to a similar conclusion about optimal timing?
That’s unfortunate. It seem like it would have been better for you to start with the optimal timing analysis from an impersonal perspective since an impersonal perspective seems much more plausible than a person-affecting perspective.
Do you think your analysis of optimal timing from the person-affecting view is useful even if person-affecting views are wrong?
Do you think an analysis of optimal timing from an all-things-considered moral parliamentary perspective that only gives some weight to person-affecting views as appropriate would come to a similar conclusion about optimal timing?