"Before any serious reflection, most of us would probably agree that—at least normally—we should not violate our consciences by acting or believing against its dictates and verdicts. Perhaps we would agree because we know how painful and damaging the pangs of a guilty conscience can be. Or perhaps we would agree because violating our consciences is discouraged or else forbidden in our larger religious or moral tradition. At the very least, highlighting this likely point of agreement raises an important question: Why, exactly, shouldn’t we violate our consciences? Why is it wrong for me to violate my conscience or for you to violate yours? Providing a clear and compelling answer to this question becomes especially crucial in light of human error and the fallibility of conscience. Just consider: If many of us would likely agree that we should normally act and believe in accordance with our consciences, but yet we also likely agree that conscience can err, then what reasons do we have—if any—to listen to its dictates and verdicts? Why would it be wrong to act or believe contrary to our conscience that is, admittedly, prone to error?
In this paper, I work through a few possible answers to the question concerning the wrongness of violating our consciences. I begin by first evaluating the relationship that conscience may have with our identity, exploring whether or not the wrongness of violating our consciences is related to the wrongness of undermining our identities. In particular, I explore whether acting or believing against who we are is morally impermissible and whether this might adequately explain the wrongness of violating your conscience. Second, I evaluate the relationship that conscience may have with our integrity, similarly exploring whether or not the wrongness of violating our conscience is related to fracturing our integrity. Here, I explore whether acting or believing contrary to our otherwise regularly integrated set of beliefs and corresponding actions is morally impermissible—and whether this, too, might explain the wrongness of violating your conscience. Finally, I evaluate the relationship that a clear or joyful conscience may have with our well-being, exploring whether or not the wrongness of violating our conscience is related to the wrongness of damaging our well-being. In particular, I am interested in exploring the range of harmful effects that acting or believing against the volitional impossibilities of conscience may have on our overall well-being—and whether this might also help explain the wrongness of violating your conscience as well. Overall, I conclude that the relationship that conscience seems to have with our identity, integrity, and overall well-being can provide strong, prima facie yet defeasible reasons to abstain from believing or acting contrary to its dictates and verdicts. Such a conclusion implies that, while it may normally be wrong to violate our consciences, it is likely not always wrong to do so."