The purpose of the Just War Theory is to establish a guide to the correct way for countries to act in situations of potential conflicts. Just War only applies to the states but not people even though the individuals can always use the theory of Just War in deciding whether it is right to take part in a particular war. Just War offers individuals and political groups with a useful framework to use in their discussions for possibilities of wars. The aim of the Just War theory is not to justify wars, but its objective is to prevent their occurrence by providing a guide that going to war is wrong except for certain limited circumstances. It, therefore, motivates the concept of finding other ways of resolving conflicts and preventing …show more content…
Later in life, the character traits will enable the individuals to make correct and informed decisions. The advocates of the virtue theory or its theorists provide an emphasis that requires people to learn how to do away with the bad characters such as anger and greed. These vices prevent the ways of becoming a good person.
The deontological theory differs from the virtue theory in that deontology involves the systems that get characterized by focusing upon the adherence to the independent duties or moral rules. Therefore, in the process of making the right moral choices, it is important to understand what the moral responsibilities are the correct rules in existence that regulates those responsibilities. Following the responsibilities or the duties would mean behaving morally and failing to follow them would result into …show more content…
The issue is that this would have the effect of negating the position of the relativist because there is no clear universal agreement concerning the ethical relativism truth. The disagreements are often quite over-rated. In most of the instances, disagreements are not moral arguments but are facts. For example, many individuals residing in India do not feed on cows as a result of believing in reincarnation. This is the reason they have the belief that the cows have the souls of the human beings that had passed way. It is contrary to the U.S where there is no believe that cows posses the souls of the human beings. As a result, cows can be eaten in the U.S but do not feed on the Grandma. It, therefore, appears that there exists a fundamental disagreement on the moral principle between the Americans and the Indians. This would be a hasty conclusion. However, both of the cultures have the belief that it is obscene to feed on Grandma because Indians still clings to the belief that a cow may still be a Grandma. Therefore, it would be a disagreement concerning the realities but not a disagreement in the primary moral principle that separates the culinary