Future Selves Council

---
name: future-selves-council
description: "Bring three versions of future-you into a decision — you in a week, in a year, and in ten years — because they each want different things. Use when asked what would future me want, will I regret this, think long-term about this choice, or help me decide for the long run. Produces each future self's honest take on today's decision, where they conflict (short-term relief vs long-term payoff), whose vote should weigh most given what's at stake, and the choice that best serves the future-you that matters here."
---

# Future Selves Council

Most bad decisions are a fight between present-you (who wants relief now) and future-you (who pays for it). This seats three future selves — one week out, one year out, ten years out — and lets each say what they'd want you to do today. Their conflict *is* the decision, and seeing it clearly usually makes the right move obvious.

## What This Skill Produces

- **Three future takes** — you-in-a-week, you-in-a-year, you-in-ten-years, each on today's decision
- **The conflict** — where short-term relief and long-term payoff pull against each other (the heart of most tough choices)
- **Whose vote weighs most** — which future self should dominate given what's actually at stake here
- **The choice that serves them** — the decision that best honors the future-you that matters most, and how to make it bearable for present-you

## Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:
- **The decision** — what you're choosing, especially if it's now-vs-later
- **The now-pull** — what present-you wants (comfort, avoidance, a treat, safety)
- **The stakes** — reversible and small, or lasting and big
- **Your values** — what future-you would actually care about

## Framework: Let Each Future Self Vote

1. **Convene the three.** One week, one year, ten years out — each has genuinely different priorities.
2. **Let them speak honestly.** Week-you might want relief; year-you wants momentum; decade-you wants the compounding choice. Don't sanitize.
3. **Name the conflict.** Most decisions are present-comfort vs future-payoff — make that trade explicit rather than pretending it away.
4. **Weight the vote by stakes.** For big, hard-to-reverse choices, decade-you should dominate; for small reversible ones, don't over-torture present-you.
5. **Make it doable.** Pick the choice that serves the deciding future self, and add the smallest concession that makes present-you able to actually do it.

## Output Format

### Decision: [what you're choosing]

**🗓 You in a week:** [what they'd want].
**📆 You in a year:** [what they'd want].
**🔟 You in ten years:** [what they'd want].

**The conflict:** [present relief vs long-term payoff — the real trade].
**Whose vote weighs most here:** [which future self + why, given the stakes].
**The call:** [choice that serves them] + [a small concession so present-you can do it].

## Quality Checks
- [ ] All three future selves give distinct, honest takes
- [ ] The present-vs-future conflict is made explicit
- [ ] The vote is weighted by the stakes (not always "think long-term")
- [ ] The final call serves the right future self
- [ ] It adds a concession to make the choice actually doable

## Anti-Patterns
- **All three futures agreeing** — no real tension.
- **Always defaulting to "long-term wins"** even for trivial reversible choices.
- **Ignoring present-you** entirely so the plan is unbearable.
- **No actual decision** at the end.

## Example Trigger Phrases
- "Will I regret skipping this? What would future me want?"
- "Help me think long-term about whether to take this contract."
- "Present me wants to quit — what do my future selves say?"
- "Should I spend this or save it? Ask future me."
- "Decide this for the long run, but keep it doable now."