Since value scales can only be inferred from an acting person's choices in action, we can never infer that alternatives are "equal" in utility. Confronted with a choice between mutually exclusive alternatives X and Y, the actor cannot choose both. If the decision is very difficult, then the actor may elect one or the other in a whimsical manner (e. g., by tossing a coin), thereby defining a subjective preference for that alternative. An irrational individual may even deem the psychological cost of a possibly "wrong" decision to be prohibitively high and refuse to choose either X or Y. That refusal is thus a third alternative, having highest ranking on his or her subjective value scale. Even then, we have no basis for concluding that X and Y are "equal" in utility.