On the classical understanding, an agent is fully excused for an action if and only if performing this action was a case of faultless wrongdoing. A major motivation for this view is the apparent existence of paradigmatic types of excusing considerations, affecting fault but not wrongness. I show that three such considerations, ignorance, duress and compulsion, can be shown to have direct bearing on the permissibility of actions. The appeal to distinctly identifiable excusing considerations thus does not stand up to closer scrutiny, undermining the classical view and giving us reason to seek alternative ways of drawing the justification/excuse distinction.

中文翻译：

---

为不法行为得到充分的宽恕

根据经典理解，当且仅当执行此操作是无过错的不当行为时，代理人才能完全免除该行为。这种观点的一个主要动机是显然存在范式类型的免责考虑，影响错误但不影响错误。我展示了三种这样的考虑因素，无知、胁迫和强迫，可以证明对行为的可允许性有直接影响。因此，诉诸明显可识别的借口考量经不起更仔细的审查，破坏了经典观点，并使我们有理由寻求其他方法来区分正当理由/借口。