"You don't know what you would do in x situation because

Empiricism.

>>8155521
You don't know what you would do in x situation even if you were in x situation. You only know what you did do.

>>8155521

It's not a fallacy.

There is no alternative to experience.

>>8155521
>>8155528
You don't even know what you've actually done in x situation even if you were aware of your actions in x situation while you were in it and afterwards. You only know what you know you have done.

>>8155554
You don't know me.

>>8155559
I wouldn't actually know you even if I did have relevant knowledge about you. I'd only know what I knew.

>>8155586
le how do le you know that XDD

It's not a fallacy unless they mean to suggest that you can't have an opinion on the morality of the action taken in that circumstance. If you were saying "I would do x" then they are right, because you cannot be sure that you actually would take the action you think you would.

>>8155595
best response so far

>>8155532
See: >>8155524

>>8155521
its only a logical fallacy if the statement it is trying to refute was prefaced with "for the sake of argument". But if someone is criticizing a soldier for acting cowardly or something then of course its a logical fallacy.

>>8155723
not*. fuck I am drunk