What I want to do in this paper is to present the 3 different egoistic theories, explain them in brief , and then focus on psychological egoism, presenting its argument, responding to the different criticisms and see in the end if its thesis begs the question or not.
The human actions and motivations have been an issue which philosophers argued on. Several ethical theories were proposed in order to justify or explain the human actions. We can justify the human actions by claiming normativity “what one ought to do” and I can explain by claiming descriptive ethics “what one does do”. The explanatory claims are descriptive in position in which they present principles that can’t be broken like sociology and laws of science, while normative claims are justificatory in position that explains in a sense “one ought” thus generating duties. For this, three arguments for egoism were presented: The Psychological egoism, the ethical egoism or common sense morality in disguise and the rational egoism.
Ethical theories are theories that assigns fundamental role to self-interest. This fundamental role can be explanatory or justificatory. Rational egoism states that any act is rational if and only if it serves self-interest. It doesn’t say anything about moral acts, making it a non-moral theory.
Ethical egoism states that an act is good if and only if it serves self-interest. It is a normative theory holding that people ought to do what is in their self- interest
The problem with ethical egoism is that it doesn’t match our common sense morality, this can be explained by the following: Normally, people decide which moral theory is right depending on their moral intuitions and on their ethical judgments and in return,...
... middle of paper ...
...ersonal welfare.
As a conclusion, psychological egoism looks at human psychology and motivation and works in proving that all humans are egoistically motivated being against any other moral theory that includes altruistic or deontic behaviors. But this thesis has showed its weakness in self-sacrificing acts and being emasculated by answering that every action is egoistic from the perspective that every person do what he wanted to do making it trivially true. In this paper, I presented examples showing our egoism in our daily actions and shed the light on the weakness of the psychological egoism, offering a replacement of this theory called the predominant egoism.
Resources:
Shaver, Robert. "Egoism.", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta , 04 Nov. 2002. 28 Mar. 2014 .
Adam Smith’s moral theory explains that there is an “impartial spectator” inside each of us that aids in determining what is morally and universally good, using our personal experiences and human commonalities. In order to judge our own actions, we judge and observe the actions of others, at the same time observing their judgments of us. Our impartial spectator efficiently allows us to take on two perceptions at once: one is our own, determined by self-interest, and the other is an imaginary observer. This paper will analyze the impartiality of the impartial spectator, by analyzing how humans are motivated by self-interest.
The human ego feeds off of self-interest, constantly wanting praise and validation. Morals, existent in all humans are a prime target for the ego. Moral superiority satisfies the ego. Joan Didion criticizes the human tendency to disguise their sanctimonious actions as moral imperatives in her essay, “On Morality”. Didion expresses distaste for the ego, describing it as a “monstrous
Ethical egoism is the normative view that each individual should seek out their own self-interest (Robbins). One ought to act and do what is in one’s own maximum interest, benefit, or advantage; and, the action must be moralistic for it to produce happiness. According to this theory morality is based on everyone promoting their self-interest or selfish motives. In the article “Ethical Egoism” by Jan Narveson. Narveson quotes Bishop Joseph Butler’s theory of rational behavior as “the rational agent acts so as to maximize the realization of one’s interest.” Meaning that one will only act if they are carrying out an action with the intention to achieve their interest to its full extent.
The descriptive claim made by Psychological Egoists is that humans, by nature, are motivated only by self-interest. Any act, no matter how altruistic it may seem on the outside is actually only a disguise for a selfish desire such as recognition, avoiding guilt, reward or sense of personal ‘goodness’ or morality. For example, Mother Teresa is just using the poor for her own long-term spiritual gain. Being a universal claim, it could falter with a single counterexample. And being that I believe this claim to be bunk I will tell you why!
The view of an Ethical Egoist, henceforth to be referred as the egoist, is quite simple in a way. The way to determine WWTED (What would the egoist do?), can be easily done if one refers back to the principles of an egoist. The view of an egoist depends on the following: 1. We ought always to do what is in our long term best interest, 2. The right act, or duty, is the act that maximizes our long term intrinsic good, and 3. Our duty is to do that which benefits us the most in the long term. In other words, an egoist’s actions and decisions depend on whether the act will benefit himself in the long run.
In philosophy, egoism is the theory that one's self is, or should be, the motivation and the goal of one's own action. There are many different forms of egoism, for example, there is psychological egoism, ethical egoism, rational egoism and much more. All these different types of egoism differ in different types of ways but in of all of them it is implied that we are all self-interested and not interested in others.
This topic is important in helping us as philosophers get down to the roots of why we do the things we do, answering questions about the human motive and the philosophy behind reasoning we cannot explain. Psychological egoism provides an answer to philosophical questions like “Why do we do the things we do?” It was perhap...
If one wishes to be a psychological egoist, then one needs to explain why people do certain actions that appear to be genuine acts of altruism.
• Once more, the ordinary science’ proves itself as the master of classification, inventing and defining the various categories of Egoism. Per example, psychological egoism, which defines doctrine that an individual is always motivated by self-interest, then rational egoism which unquestionably advocates acting in self-interest. Ethical egoism as diametrically opposite of ethical altruism which obliges a moral agent to assist the other first, even if sacrifices own interest. Also, ethical egoism differs from both rational and psychological egoism in ‘defending’ doctrine which considers all actions with contributive beneficial effects for an acting individual
Egoism is the idea that a person believes they should do whatever is necessary to attain their own advancements and pleasures, disregarding their dishonorable acts. Plenty who have egoistic traits believe it is the justifications of such behaviors that drives one to exhibit unethical decisions. In fact, no matter how clear a goal may appear one always experiences unexpected circumstances when trying to reach any goal. Consequently, individuals tend to turn to their religions, when put under unexpected predicaments. For this reason, they end up turning to religion to fix their circumstances, or to forgive them from all wrongdoings to help ease their consciousness. Therefore, their egoistic traits leads them towards “conditional faith,” only
Egoism is a teleological theory of ethics that sets the ultimate criterion of morality in some nonmoral value (i.e. happiness or welfare) that results from acts (Pojman 276). It is contrasted with altruism, which is the view that one's actions ought to further the interests or good of other people, ideally to the exclusion of one's own interests (Pojman 272). This essay will explain the relation between psychological egoism and ethical egoism. It will examine how someone who believes in psychological egoism explains the apparent instances of altruism. And it will discuss some arguments in favor of universal ethical egoism, and exam Pojman's critque of arguments for and against universal ethical egoism.
Psychological egoism is the view that people are always selfish. When was the last time you did a good deed? Did you do it for its own sake, or for your own? The egoist says that all of us are necessarily self-regarding. I shall argue that this view is incorrect.
Ethical egoism is arbitrary and puts ourselves above everybody else for no apparent reason. Ethical egoism splits everybody into two groups, ourselves and everyone else, and says that we are the morally superior. This brings up the question, why are we, ourselves, morally superior to everyone else? Failing to answer this question, means that the ethical egoist has no rational reason to choose ourselves over anybody else. So, with similar rational, it could just have been that everyone else is morally superior to ourselves. The ethical egoist seems to be completely arbitrary in this decision. This theory doesn’t even know why it is putting us, ourselves, above everybody else. One can compare this to a racist who says white people are more superior to blacks (Rachels). Several decades ago they would rationally argue that blacks are intellectually inferior and a threat to the world peace but today there is substantial amount of evidence to refute these claims. Now the racist has no reasons for the racial discriminations and white people and black people are equal, meaning that being racially against black people is arbitrary and has no rational reasoning. Indeed, ethical egoism is just as arbitrary as racism is, but once again, utilitarianism
Ethics is concerned with finding rational arguments in all ethical questions. It is concerned with right, or good and bad. A lot of theories have been proposed and amongst them there is psychological egoism which is attributed to Thomas Hobbes who lived from 1558–1679 and ethical egoism, which was largely supported by Ayn Rand who lived from 1908-1982. This paper seeks to give a detailed account of psychological egoism and ethical egoism, and a clear description of the central differences between psychological egoism and ethical egoism will be suggested. Furthermore, some of the major flaws found in each of the two theories will also be considered.
Ethical egoism can be a well-debated topic about the true intention of an individual when he or she makes an ethical decision. Max Stirner brings up a very intriguing perspective in writing, The Ego and its Own, regarding ethical egoism. After reading his writing some questions are posed. For example, are human beings at the bottom? Following Wiggins and Putnam, can we rise above our egoism and truly be altruistic? And finally, if we are something, do we have the capacity to rise to a level that we can criticize and transcend our nature? These questions try to establish whether or not we are simple humans, bound to our intrinsic nature, or far more intellectually advanced than we allow ourselves to be.