Talk:conformism

Missing philosophy sense, contrasted with effectivism?

Saw this in Google Books' snippet of The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Death (2015, page 331), which seems to be quoting Steven Luper's Retroactive Harms and Wrongs [1] — so it may not have been used outside of that one paper. But it says:

For example, in now desiring that I will marry next week, I now get what I want if it is now true that I will marry next week. There is, however, another view. Perhaps my desire for P is not fulfilled at T unless P's truth maker occurs at T. At issue is which of the following positions is correct:

Conformist claim: Subject S's desire P is fulfilled at T only if, at T, S desires P and P holds.

Effectivist claim: Subject S's desire P is fulfilled at T only if, at T, S desires P and P's truth maker occurs.

He adds, "There are, of course, further alternatives to conformism and effectivism..." Equinox ◑ 18:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)