I think one can also justify talk of backward causality along the lines of what Scott says on p. 23:
our choices today might play a role in selecting one past from a giant ensemble of macroscopically-identical but microscopically-different pasts.
If we are considering actions A and B now, and these correspond to microscopically different past facts X and Y, and there is no other route to knowledge of X or Y, it seems reasonable to agree with Scott that we are “selecting one past”.
I think one can also justify talk of backward causality along the lines of what Scott says on p. 23:
If we are considering actions A and B now, and these correspond to microscopically different past facts X and Y, and there is no other route to knowledge of X or Y, it seems reasonable to agree with Scott that we are “selecting one past”.