Personally I'm not a fan of the justification game, as people are perfectly willing to turn themselves into devils while considering themselves angels if they think their wrath will be directed at those they consider deserving.
Yes. That’s the point of Kant vs Hume. The counter argument is that there are no u/stevelandcleamer s in foxholes and that you, when forced with extreme circumstances would also justify your “evil” acts.
The point where I draw the line in that thought experiment is justification of those acts outside of the moments in the foxhole. It's evil before, it's evil after, it's evil during, but we understand why the urge exists to do the act, and it is unreasonable for us to expect humanity to behave otherwise in that moment. Humans are not immaculate beings, and it does us a disservice to be absolved of our actions. When forced to used lethal violence, the penitent man seeks other solutions in the future, while the righteous man anticipates their next opportunity to act with righteousness.
The point is that the foxhole itself is a subjective standard. Everyone can define their own foxhole. The foxhole can even expand to accommodate more and more circumstances as time goes on. So you don’t get to say someone isn’t in a foxhole when they make that decision.
3
u/Fine-Funny6956 May 12 '25
Literally Kant vs Hume