Morality of actions define whether an action is considered as morally correct or not therefore it is important that some practical examples of actions which can be considered as good or not are presented. In this section, I will enumerate three examples each of actions which can be considered as morally right or wrong.
Above examples indicate that the morality of each of the actions described above are based on their relative connection with the individual perception of good and bad. Individuals may perceive and internalize the truth according to their own mental perception of how they view and process the facts from moral perspectives.
The underlying moral principle which I believe can succinctly define above actions is the relativistism of these actions with good or bad. Actions can be considered as good or bad based on the way they are related with acceptable ways of doing things. I, therefore, believe that my underlying moral principle based on the above actions is related with relativistim of actions with acceptable norms and values. For example, war in its strictest sense may be morally wrong, however, considering the circumstances around 9/11 event and loss of innocent lives, it may be a morally justified war because it is based on a contextual point of reference. The moral principle described above therefore is a direct derivative of the examples mentioned above.
The basic underlying principles of Utilitarianism advocate on the utility of the actions regardless of their consequences, therefore, any action under utilitarianism is considered as morally right, which can create greatest good for the greatest number of people. This is regardless of the fact the consequences of the action may not be entirely favorable or good, and it was because of this reason that utilitarianism endorses actions, which have significantly different consequences for minority.
My principle is similar to the utilitarianism in the sense that both