This paper addresses the ideal of moral imagination, Matthew Brown’s pragmatist account of how to reason about values in science. Pragmatism points our attention to practical consequences, but practical for whom? Brown follows John Dewey in thinking that this should be actually existing stakeholders. Extending Hilary Putnam’s juxtaposition of Dewey and William James, I suggest that personal existential choices may pose a problem for such an account. In some cases, it looks as if individuals should be allowed their own determination without reference to all the stakeholders. I explore some ways in which this tension might be articulated and answered within the framework of moral imagination.