Nagel believes that the difficult choices we make and the outcome of those decisions cannot be predicted. It is possible to make an evaluation of the choice in advance; however, we must wait for another evaluation of the choice to know the outcome, because the outcome determines what was done. I believe Nagel is right about evaluating choices and outcome because you can make a choice before the action happens because an unexpected action happens and you have to choose another choice which dictates the outcome of your choice. In Moral Luck, Nagel believes that certain actions are unjustifiably wrong in themselves or risk that the results of the action will not correct it. When outcome plays a role in moral judgment, it can be objective and timeless. Kant insisted on the irrelevance of personality traits under the control of the will. If Kant believes this, it would rule out moral judgments about virtues and vices. I disagree with Kant, I believe that when it comes to a good will, the outcome and action is affected by your personality and the traits that might constitute the will.