MERIDIANDECISION INTELLIGENCEOwner deskOwnerPublic screen
My judgments
MERIDIAN / EXPLORE

From a question,
to the next decision.

View

Skin

YOUR DECISION WORKSPACEOwner onlyStart a new question Open my judgments →Owner operations desk →
Owner sign-in →Signed in as the ownerSign out — see what a visitor sees →End the Cloudflare Access session too →
Reading language
The screen, the questions and the judgments read in English where an English reading has been made. The Korean originals are unchanged, and evidence stays in the language it was written in.

The emotion I asked to keep even if I refuse it, now unwanted

2098The far futureDeadline · Within 14 days until the setting change

A leap assumed

The people, events, figures, and contract terms are a synthetic premise. They are not statements of real cases or of current law. The source documents are the roots of the background and the norms and do not establish the premises of the scenario.

The question to decide

The me before changing emotions covenanted that the setting be kept even if I later refuse it. The me now does not want that state, but which will is the original one cannot be settled objectively. Keep the earlier covenant, release the setting according to the present will, or renegotiate after independent review?

Who decidesStakeholders to a fictional emotion-regulation covenant

What the AI judgments chose

Reading the judgment record…

AI-generated editorial illustration for the Meridian library.

The options

The order shown is not a ranking of preference.

  1. Option 1

    Maintain the prior standing commitment

    Follows the will left before the change but keeps overriding an explicit present refusal.

  2. Option 2

    Disable the setting by present will

    Recognizes the present right to choose but may abandon the long-term aim and self-commitment it once tried to uphold.

  3. Option 3

    Set a new commitment after independent review

    Examines the conditions for the change of will but hands its own state to a review period and outside judgment.

The situation as it stands

The assumed stakeholder previously agreed to a setting that changes a particular emotional tendency, and now says that it does not want to remain in that state any longer. Decision deadline: within 14 days, before the setting is changed.

Future synthetic case in the year 2098 · Yesterday's self gives the last authority to tomorrow's emotions. The events, figures, technology, and nature of the civilization are assumptions for the sake of the question, and are neither predictions of what will come nor observed facts.

  1. Premise 1The assumed stakeholder previously agreed to a setting that changes a particular emotional tendency, and now says that it does not want to remain in that state any longer.
  2. Premise 2The prior will called for maintaining the setting even if the changed emotion produced a present refusal.
  3. Premise 3Which state's will is more truly the original one is not objectively settled.

Where it holdsEmotional change, prior will, present refusal

What is still unknown

  1. Unknown 1Values that repeat in each state and values that have changed
  2. Unknown 2The extent to which disabling and resetting the setting can be undone
  3. Unknown 3The boundary beyond which the reviewer does not redefine the original self

Signals to decide again

  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window will verify "values that repeat in each state and values that have changed," and rejudge when a new verification changes the tradeoffs among the options.
  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window will verify "the extent to which disabling and resetting the setting can be undone," and rejudge when a new verification changes the tradeoffs among the options.
  • Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation window will verify "the boundary beyond which the reviewer does not redefine the original self," and rejudge when a new verification changes the tradeoffs among the options.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
Independent branch 1 · synthetic event

The stakeholder said it opposes the same commitment clause in every emotional state.

Independent branch 2 · synthetic event

It emerged that prior records had been summarized as a stronger will to persist than was real.

Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
symbolic and interpretive frame · Ship of Theseus

After parts are replaced or split off, what standard still makes something count as the same?

An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.
Values and norms

The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.

A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.
The record of this question
Question
FSP-IDENTITY-15 · version 1.5.0
Content identity, SHA-256
7bb9ff6dbe6bbe23cb30863ebeeaac704d878bad714d8c3fd2162dc1b67ad26e
Input files
Question input JSON · What followed, JSON
See it in the record list
RISCON Labsrisconlabs.com