“Also, decision for children is a shared decision, so I additionally assume the partner would match this.”
Even if something is a shared decision, you can always first think about your own preferences.
But my preferences are entangled with everybody else’s preferences. If you put me into hypothetical worlds where those people prefer differently, so do I.
People may disagree with this entanglement, but they are likely wrong. Out preferences are largely shaped by our upbringing, our peers, and society at large. And this is necessary: People can not grow up to functioning adults without this learning environment, as is proven, e.g., by feral children.
Of course, preferences are shaped by your social environment, but I assume that in any given situation you could still state a preference on the basis of which you would then enter into an exchange with the other relevant people?
But my preferences are entangled with everybody else’s preferences. If you put me into hypothetical worlds where those people prefer differently, so do I.
People may disagree with this entanglement, but they are likely wrong. Out preferences are largely shaped by our upbringing, our peers, and society at large. And this is necessary: People can not grow up to functioning adults without this learning environment, as is proven, e.g., by feral children.
Of course, preferences are shaped by your social environment, but I assume that in any given situation you could still state a preference on the basis of which you would then enter into an exchange with the other relevant people?
Yes, that would be possible, but it would lead to different results.