PERSONAL CANON PC04 DECISION REPLAY GRID
The capstone interaction separates two dimensions that retrospective reasoning usually collapses:
Presentation-only rendering. Counterpedia preserves this document’s source Markdown bytes exactly and formats them for reading here. This does not admit the document, verify its claims, or convert it into a governed Counterpedia entry.
The capstone interaction separates two dimensions that retrospective reasoning usually collapses:
FACT BASIS
VALUE BASISGrid
| Values then | Values now | |
|---|---|---|
| Facts then | A — Historical self | B — Value-drift counterfactual |
| Facts now | C — Hindsight counterfactual | D — Current self |
A — Facts then × Values then
What did I actually decide with?
This is historical replay.
It reconstructs:
public evidence available then;
private forecasts then;
private preferences then;
constraints then.
No later facts.
No current values.
B — Facts then × Values now
Would I choose differently solely because my priorities changed?
This isolates value drift.
It is a counterfactual projection, not a historical memory.
C — Facts now × Values then
Would old-me choose differently if old-me knew what happened later?
This isolates new evidence / hindsight while holding preferences fixed.
It is also counterfactual.
D — Facts now × Values now
What do I prefer now?
This is the current context.
Why this matters
If A and D differ, the system should not jump to:
past self was wrongCompare:
A → B
change caused by values
A → C
change caused by facts/evidence
B/C → D
combined current contextThis is the most direct way to explain why one person may rationally disagree with their past self.
Core invariant
Replay preserves the old context. Counterfactuals deliberately change one context dimension. Neither overwrites the historical state.