Examples Of Deontological And Teleological

In this paper I intend to show examples of deontological and teleological on how they are critiquing war. The first paragraph will exemplify evidence of a deontological view and how its critiquing and affecting just war. I will also be reasoning why it’s better than teleological. The second paragraph will represent the teleological aspect, how it cannot critique wars, as well how teleological is less effective than deontological. Finally, in the third paragraph, I will revise both arguments and personally assess them, then, determine if the arguments were successful. Firstly, I will broadly represent the deontological side of war and how it morally critiques war. From class notes, deontological is the theory of justice,
Teleological is a theory of justice, equality and other moral concepts is based on the consequences our actions have for ourselves or others (or both). Basically, teleological is based on consequences our actions have due to our own self-interest and moral. Teleological can be judged differently, having many different point of views in war. An example would be in the article, The Ethics on Killing in War, by John McMahan, which he talked about the first United States war with Iraq. During the war, the entire Iraqi combatants fought to keep back the of their country’s unjust invasion, which made them unjust combatants. But, some Iraqi combatants carried a much greater responsibility than others. It would be justifiable to determine the Iraqi Republican Guard, a wealthy higher up, forced the loyal to the regime, who are responsible for their actions to higher standard, than to a rusty armed draftee who has been attacked by threats to themselves and their families. Due to blackmails and threats to the poor, it changed their self- interest, which derived and prompted their actions. In the text, it stated, “More generally, it is true of most unjust combatants that their conduct is excused to varying degrees by the sorts of consideration Walzer mentions in arguing that they are not criminals and that these excuses diminish their liability to varying degrees” (McMahan,
However, I do acknowledge, there are counter arguments to the teleological theory of war. An example of a counter argument for teleology would be in in the article, The Triumph of War, by Michael Waltz, when he brought up the Afghan- Russian war. During the war, the United States government got involved and fought along-side and aiding with the Afghan against the Russians. At the end, the United States and Afghan won a triumph victory, causing the Russians to retreat. The United States aided Afghan because of self-interest in international relations, geographic land, and war procedures. When the war was over, Afghanistan’s homeland was disheveled and demolished. The Russians retreated and had the morally right to do so. On the other hand, the United States left Afghanistan which was, the politically and morally wrong thing to do. The third principle of JWT stated, “The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought” (Lecture Notes Online). Leaving Afghanistan in the circumstances they were in after the war, the Unites States technically did not restore peace. Even though they won the war, it did not restore peace, but worsen it. This is how he United States violated the third principle of the Just War Theory, showing how teleological can be