No it's not (it snot).
It's doing things one at a time. I'm not saying he's NOT wrong. I'm also not saying "nyah, nyah". I'm trying to say something like: It is ALWAYS wrong not to 'follow your conscience' (where 'conscience' is rightly understood) even though following your conscience is no guarantee that you will do the right thing.
And when the best your conscience can do is to lead you astray, while you have the benefits of having followed your conscience, you're still astray, and suffer the consequences of that.
And then I'm saying that, of course, those who do not acknowledge the self-evident truth that I am right will, in their delusion, think that I am missing out on something because I have my opinion.
I guess I think it important in these conversations to make clear when I don't think I've given a comprehensive and conclusive answer and to, so to speak, pre-emptively acknowledge that there are still disagreements left to be discussed.
But what of you have no conscience (i.e. psychopaths)? What if your conscience excludes the rest and has no regard for the world around you?
Our conscience is o guide. We will be wrong vis-a-vis what Christ taught if we follow our conscience because of pride.
If Christ is the light, the way and truth then it is not or conscience but Him that we need to follow always. But we don't.