i think Hunger or famine would be a good topic
A. Legally recongized member of a country
In conclusion, a person's intentions are more important than the action's effects when determining wrongness. Since a moral judgment should be immune to luck, and effects are more affected by luck than intentions, the injustice of moral luck clearly leads to this conclusion.
Morality refers to the set of requirements that allow human beings to stay cooperatively in agencies. it's what societies determine to be “right” and “suited.” once in a while, appearing in a moral way manner individuals should sacrifice their own short-time period pursuits to advantage society.
Morality is the same old of society used to determine what is proper or incorrect conduct. An example of morality is the belief by a person that it is incorrect to take what would not belong to them, even though no person would understand.
Ethics and morals relate to “right” and “incorrect” conduct. whilst they are every so often used interchangeably, they are special: ethics seek advice from policies supplied by an outside supply, e.g., codes of conduct in workplaces or principles in religions. Morals refer to a man or woman's personal principles regarding right and wrong.
Learn more about morality here brainly.com/question/1326871
#SPJ4
The nature of each one's relationship to Sally is what sociologists call a tie.
Explanation:
Strong and weak ties are relevant when socializing in an environment. A strong tie is someone who know you very well and whom you also trust in all endeavors and at all times. Mostly Blood relations form such ties.
Weak ties are the people who establish a relationship for a short period of time. examples are like a train passenger who shares good terms with you and they move in their own way when they reach the destination. A common friend establishes such a relationship who stays with you until the other person is friendly and then they leave.
Answer: The correct answer is : Attacking the Motive
Explanation: The fallacy of attacking the motive happens when a person argues that the position of another person is invalid. In other words, the second argumentator attacks the first arguer's thesis and does so in a defiant way in his motives behind his argument, such as what benefits from his proposed thesis.
