Principles are really important, and by and large you should try hard to stick to them. I have tremendous respect for those who have died or gone to jail for their principles.
That said, a principle is just a rule, albeit a highly abstracted and abnormally emotional rule. And it is important not to follow rules blindly but to consider whether they apply in a given situation. It is rare that a principle applies in all situations for a given person (how many people truly would never kill, even in self defense?) and it is impossible for a principle to apply in all situations for all people. So you have to use your personal judgment.
This doesn’t mean “oh, whatever, just go with your gut”. But it does mean “I have thought deeply about this and weighed the various principles and factors involved and this is what my gut says”. Hence the title of this post*. “Judgment Above Principle”: aka personal judgment is more important than sticking to principles. “Judgment After Principle”: aka personal judgment requires a thoughtful consideration of principles. It is not a rejection of principles but a transcendence of them.
This post on Emptywheel highlights a great example of putting judgment above principle:
Marcy’s post was not primarily about the investigation into the Russian interference in the 2016 election, though that is what has gotten a lot of the attention. What she was really talking about was the practice — or should I say “malpractice”? — of journalism. Woven into the entire post, Marcy laid out how she wrestled with a very basic question: What do you do, as a journalist, when a confidential source lies to you?
I highly recommend reading both Marcy Wheeler’s original post, Putting a Face (Mine) to the Risks Posed by GOP Games on Mueller Investigation, and Peterr’s analysis (linked above).
* The post title is also a play on a paper I was co-author on. It’s not really relevant to this post, except as a reminder that I’ve been obsessed with morality for a while. 😉