BTW, I don't think you can believe in the correctness of utility functions.

That is not the correct interpretation of my statement. The broad foundations of a utility function can give people a motivation for calculating certain probabilities and may influence the language that is used.

It seems that you try to mix these different aspects.

No, and I expressed explicitly an objection to doing so, to the point where for me to do so further would be harping on about it. I am willing to engage with those who evaluate probabilities from the position of assuming they will be a person who will be experiencing life. The language is usually ambiguous and clarified by the declared assumptions.

I doubt discussing this further will give either of us any remarkable insights. Mostly because the concepts are trivial (given the appropriate background).