...Ethical Egoism We will be discussing the strengths and weaknesses of ethical egoism, but before we begin we first must understand what ethical egoism is and what is involved. Ethical egoism is the normative ethical position that moral agents ought to do what is in their own self-interest. It differs from psychological egoism, which claims that people can only act in their self-interest. Ethical egoism also differs from rational egoism, which holds that it is rational to act in one's self-interest. Ethical egoism contrasts with ethical altruism, which holds that moral agents have an obligation to help others. Egoism and altruism both contrast with ethical utilitarianism, which holds that a moral agent should treat one's self with no higher regard than one has for others as egoism does, by elevating self-interests and the self to a status not granted to others, but that one also should not as altruism does sacrifice one's own interests to help others' interests, so long as one's own interests (i.e. one's own desires or well-being) are substantially equivalent to the others' interests and well-being. Egoism, utilitarianism, and altruism are all forms of consequentialism, but egoism and altruism contrast with utilitarianism, in that egoism and altruism are both agent-focused forms of consequentialism (i.e. subject-focused or subjective), but utilitarianism is called agent-neutral (i.e. objective and impartial) as it does not treat the subject's (i.e...
Words: 433 - Pages: 2
...Ethical Egoism Ethical egoism is a normative theory based on the promotion of one’s own good in accordance with morality (Moseley). Shaver avers that based on the ethical egoism theory it is necessary and sufficient for an action to be morally right and that it maximizes one's self-interest. The promotion and pursuance of one’s self-interest underscores the normative theory. It prescribes the motivation of one’s thought, behaviour, and action. To fully understand the ethical egoism theory we must first know certain principles behind it. Ethical egoism is a normative theory, which means it prescribes how we should think, behave, and act. Three different formulations of ethical egoism have been identified: individual, personal and universal. Individual ethical egoism is the prescriptive doctrine that all persons should serve self-interest. Personal ethical egoism is the belief that one should act from the motive of self-interest. Universal ethical egoism is the universal doctrine that all persons should pursue their own interests exclusively (Shaver). A theory of ethics is said to be coherent if it is founded in truth, consistent and complete. ‘In truth’ means that a statement of action is either true or false and not both. Consistency means that there should be no contradictions or incompatible statements. Completeness means that there should be no moral truth, which is not provable from the basic moral principles of the theory (Moseley). Shaver’s...
Words: 1015 - Pages: 5
...Psychological Egoism and Ethical Egoism: A Comparison Abstract There is a certain innate desire to help others, just as others will feel that same fulfillment for returning that aid. At the same time, however, there is also an inherent yearning to seek out one’s own best interest. This brings about a discussion regarding the difference between psychological egoism and ethical egoism. To understand the similarities and differences, one must first understand the two concepts including their natures, as well as their doctrines of motivation. Psychological Egoism and Ethical Egoism: A Comparison Human beings place great value on the interests of both themselves and others. There is a certain innate desire to help others, just as others will feel that same fulfillment for returning that aid. At the same time, however, there is also an inherent yearning to seek out one’s own best interest. That being said, which is the more natural desire, and which of these will prevail when a decision must be made between self-interest, and the interest of others? This brings about a discussion regarding the difference between psychological egoism and ethical egoism. Philosophers as far back as Plato and Socrates – and likely further – have been pondering over these notions which remain just as relevant today. To understand the similarities and differences, one must first understand the two concepts including their natures, as well as their doctrines of motivation...
Words: 1157 - Pages: 5
...Utilitarianism, Ethical Egoism, and Moral Relativism Tom Gardner Ethics is a branch of philosophy that attempts to answer the questions; what’s right? What’s wrong? And why? Moral relativism is an ethics position that essentially states that people have disagreeing moral beliefs and therefore you must but tolerant of other's morals. This position leads to the problematic realization that if this is the case there can be no objective moral truths nor can there be any universal principles. Act utilitarianism and ethical egoism are two different ethics theories that attempt to respond to this challenge of moral relativism in different ways. Ethical egoism attempts to respond to the challenge of moral relativism by justifying that there is a universal principle for what actions are right and what are wrong. It is a form of consequentialism, which means it looks solely at the consequences of action to see if it is right or wrong. The defining sentence of egoism is as follows, “What's good for you is right and what's bad for you is wrong.” This phrase can be interpreted in a number of ways, the most popular one being: every person should act in their own self-interest. This means that when deciding on whether an action is good, any effect on others (mental or physical) by said action has no merit. An egoist that is measuring or justifying an action's goodness is only examining the possible positive or negative effects this action will have on him. The majority of the justification...
Words: 1382 - Pages: 6
...What are the advantages of ethical egoism? Advantages of ethical egoism: * It is easier for egoists to know what is in their own self-interest than it is for other moralist, who are concerned about more than self-interest, to know what is on the best interest of others. It is easier for egoists to know what is in their own self-interest than it is for other moralist * It encourages individual freedom and responsibility and fits in best, according to egoists, without capitalist economy. Ethical Egoism encourages individual freedom and responsibility. * It can work successfully as long as people are operating in limited spheres, isolated from each other, thereby minimizing conflicts. Limitation of this advantage of ethical egoism: * It offers no consistent method of resolving conflict if self-interests. Its not help resolving self-interest. * We do not live in isolated, self-sufficient communities, but rather in increasingly crowded communities where social, economic, and moral interdependence are facts of life and where self-interests conflict and somehow must be compromised. Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism. Utilitarian maintains that everyone should perform that act or follow that moral rule which will bring about the greatest good or happiness for everyone concerned. Act utilitarianism Act utilitarianism states that everyone should perform that act which will bring about the greatest good over bad for everyone affected by the...
Words: 663 - Pages: 3
...everyday life. When young children learn this rule, they are told to never forget it and to use it for the rest of their life: through school, for families, for work. There becomes a gray area, though, when The Golden Rule is brought into the workplace. For some reason, offices and workers feel that this rule doesn’t apply to them. They don’t need to be honest because, in some way, they are benefitting themselves. Business is where The Golden Rule gets tossed and people and firms start to act out of egoism, a form of moral belief. To uncover the “how, where and why” of business ethics, one must explore deeper beyond the surface. First, to understand how big businesses violate ethics, one must know what business ethics are and what they consist of. Second, to understand how businesses and workers act of out egoism, one must know what egoism is and what the beliefs pertain to. Then, connections and examples of businesses violating their ethics and how this unites it with egoism must be found to give a solid foundation for the argument. Finally, after all the connections and ties have been uncovered, one must figure out why businesses are doing such deeds. Of course it is easy to find the definition of ethics; look it up in the dictionary. To define business ethics is a little trickier; they are not grouped together in the dictionary. The Merriam Webster...
Words: 3006 - Pages: 13
...of ethics addresses consequentialism by 2 major consequentialists ethical theories which are ethical egoism and utilitarianism. Both of these theories believe that humans should behave in ways that will bring out good consequences. The difference between the two are that they disagree on who should benefit from these consequences. Ethical egoism says that human beings should act in their own self-interest, where utilitarians basically say that human beings should act in interest of all concerned. Now deep into the ethical egoism my code would more address universal ethical egoism because like most other theories it’s universal. An ethical theory that applies to all human beings. This theory does not state only what the individual should do, rather it concerning itself with all human beings should do if they want to be moral. They should act in their own self-interest. On the other hand with utilitarianism is addressed by stating that everyone should perform that act which will bring about the greatest amount of good over bad for everyone affected by the act. The belief is to not believe in setting up rules for action because they feel that each situation and each person are different. Each individual must assess the situation they are involved in and try to figure out which act would bring about the greatest amount of good consequences with the least amount of bad consequences, not just for themselves as egoism, but for everyone involved in the situation. In non-consequentialists...
Words: 814 - Pages: 4
...Mohammad Khattak Ethics for Mangers (ETM-750) Prof: Robert Bigelow Final Project The Syrian Conflict Evaluate the ethics of any legal or ethical issue in the news. Analyze the dilemma or issue. Thoroughly evaluate the appropriateness of applying at least two ethical frameworks reviewed in the course, and suggest an approach that might help to avoiding such dilemmas/issues in the future. What started off as an uprising and eventually led to a civil war, has destroyed much of Syria and resulted in the death of hundreds of thousands. And no matter what angle you look at it from, the existing regime under the command of Bashar Al Assad and his so-called "war against terrorists" has broken all barriers of ethics, morals and rules of war. Many sources have claimed foreign interference to have ignited the situation, but at the same time, the regime has spared no efforts to suppress the voice of those who stood up against the oppressive rule. But the dilemma does not end with how the situation was dealt with by the existing rulers. Nations all around the world are waiting on how the United States of America responds to the happening and whether the US can justify its reason for intervention, which it believes to be its moral duty under the principle of its 'Just War Theory'. Utilitarianism One of the ethical frameworks that would apply to the Syrian situation would be the act and rule of Utilitarianism that dictates that the actions of a party be justified so...
Words: 1654 - Pages: 7
...treat, that is the question? What would you do? How does the subject of cancer treatment apply to the moral theories of Egoism and Utilitarianism? Which theory best addresses this problem? I would assert Egoism best handles the dilemmas undressed by this ethical scenario. Egoism is a normative ethical theory that contends we act morally when in any given situation the right thing to do will be whatever maximally promotes long term self-interest. It does not describe how people behave; rather, it describes how people "ought" to behave. (Class notes February 23) This is a key element of all normative theories. Another key element of egoism lies in “long term”. Simply stated, an ethical egoist would typically not endorse running up credit card debt. While it might fulfill one's interests in the moment, it would undermine one's long term self-interest. James Rachels says it best; "Ethical egoism endorses selfishness, but it doesn't endorse foolishness.” Rachels also suggests each of us possess the ability to know what is in our own best interest, therefore to attempt to provide charity to another would directly disregard that ability. In essences, to give a man a fish would suggest they do not have the same ability you possess to acquire their own fish. Based on principles outlined by James Rachels and others, Thomas Hobbes may be viewed to be an ethical egoist, although he argued that if everyone follows their own long term self-interest completely, a logical inconsistency...
Words: 1145 - Pages: 5
...Ethical Egoism Why do people treat themselves with luxuries they don’t need if there are starving children all around the world? We could easily save from them starvation by cutting off some of our unnecessary needs as a species. People despite that knowledge still seek for their favorite over priced gadget they don’t need, or buy so much food that the end up throwing it away by the end of the end of the week cause it has gone bad, etc. My conclusion is that we all have that feeling inside of us, but unless we’re really confronted with a problem or issue that effect particularly us, there is a small chance that we are going to act. Everyone, on the other hand has experienced helping someone else, and what that action generates inside of you. The sad thing is that it is far less pursued then fulfilling our own needs. I imagine a world where everybody is aware and conscious about what is actually going on in the world. That the world poverty is understood as it’s supposed to. If hunger is acknowledged to everybody and everybody is doing something about it. I imagine a world where every single person contributes to the ones who cant. What would that world look like? Would people in general feel better as a species? Would our moralities shift towards different problems? What would the ultimate outcome look like? Would the ones who cant provide for them selves be thankful or would they in a sense get spoiled? My question is would the outcome be positive or negative if we as a species...
Words: 274 - Pages: 2
...and responsibility under right behaviors. Everyone has different values, so it is impossible to have a standard ethical guideline for everyone. Especially, people usually have different behavior standard when people meet different situations. For me, initially, I felt like I have two different standards for my family, including my girlfriend and my best friends, and for others, but after I did some researches of types of ethical theories, I feel like my ethical standard is more like the ethical egoism, partially. Ethical egoism states that individuals should do what is in their self-interest, and I really agree with this concept. In my opinion, if I cannot treat myself well, it is ridiculous and meaningless to talk about treating others well, so I always believe that I need to take care my self-interest well when I make a decision and do something. It doesn’t mean that I don’t care about others’ interest. What I believe, and most people agree with, is that I should act and achieve my self-interest, and, at the same time, others also can act and achieve their self-interest. A win-win situation is always the best way in any situation. However, sometimes, the interests of people have conflicts, and, in this situation, I will care about myself more rather than others, as long as I didn’t break the law or disobey some consensuses that followed by people as basic ethical standards, such as queue jumping, littering, and so on. As I already mentioned, I felt like I have two different...
Words: 673 - Pages: 3
...Groups Comparison.doc SOC120 Week 5 DQ 1.doc SOC120 Week 5 DQ 2.doc SOC120 Week 6 Assignment - Punishment Research Paper.doc SOC120 Week 6 CheckPoint - Deviant Behavior.doc SOC120 Week 7 CheckPoint - Urbanization Trends.doc SOC120 Week 7 DQ 1.doc SOC120 Week 7 DQ 2.doc SOC120 Week 8 Assignment - Future of Modernization Paper.doc SOC120 Week 8 CheckPoint Social Change and Modernization.doc SOC120 Week 9 Capstone DQ.doc SOC120 Week 9 Final Project - Analyze a Sociological Issue.doc Sociology - General Sociology Relativism . Give an example of something that one culture might regard as a virtue that another culture might not. Explain why this could lead to relativism. Egoism and Altruism . Psychological egoism claims that whatever we do, we do out of self-interest. Give an example of an act you think is not done out of self-interest, and explain how the psychological egoist might try to interpret that act as selfish. School Prayer . John wants prayer in school, and Mary does not. Describe a compromise position you think John and Mary might agree on, and identify any problems that position might encounter. Responsibility and Reward . You work hard in your office; overtime, weekends, and early morn...
Words: 373 - Pages: 2
...1. Is Rand correct in saying that if you accept altruism, then you end up with lack of self-esteem and a lack of respect for others? I opined that Rand is incorrect in saying this. Altruism, according to Rand, is “willing to sacrifice your life for others.” This is consistent with the dictionary definitions of altruism such as “unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others.” By accepting altruism, a person showed that he has respect for the value of life. On the contrary, studies have shown that practicing altruism enhances personal well – being and affects the community positively as a whole. And because when we give, without expecting return is true charity. To some extend; due to vested interest, people are more willing to go the extra mile to help their family and friends as they are likely to suffer if their friends and family is at risk. However, it has nothing to do with neither lack of self-esteem nor lack of respect for others. 2. Is Rand criticizing ideal or reciprocal altruism? Do you think that she would differentiate between the two? Would you? It seemed that Rand is criticizing reciprocal altruism. It refers to the human social idea and expectation that if a person performs an altruistic act, other people will perform altruistic acts in return. She argues that to sacrifice oneself for another person will result in a threat to one’s existence and helping other is not a moral duty or obligation. However, I disagree, as I know that, “no man is...
Words: 1123 - Pages: 5
...1. Is Rand correct in saying that if you accept altruism, then you end up with a lack of self-esteem and a lack of respect for others? I do not believe that Rand is correct in saying this. Accepting altruism does not mean that you have a low self-esteem or a lack of respect for others. I see it as quite the opposite. A person accepting altruism has the utmost respect for other humans. By acting in a altruistic or selfless way, by saving a drowning stranger for example, a person is showing his or her respect for the value of life. Just because we don’t know the person in danger doesn’t mean that they don’t have a family or loved ones that would feel pain if that person were to die (or drown as in my example). 2. Is Rand criticizing ideal or reciprocal altruism? Do you think that she would differentiate between the two? Would you? Rand seems to be criticizing reciprocal altruism. I think that Rand would differentiate between the two but would have more of an understanding or willingness to follow ideal altruism. I would differentiate between the two and I feel that a reciprocal altruism is more on my side of the board. I do not agree with it 100% but I can look back and find instances where I did something only because I would want someone to do it for me in the future. 3. Comment on the following quotation: “The proper method of judging when or whether one should help another person is by reference to one’s own rational self-interest and one’s own hierarchy...
Words: 618 - Pages: 3
...Say a soldier throws himself on a grenade to prevent others from being killed. It does not seem that the soldier is pursuing his perceived self-interest. It is plausible that, if asked, the soldier would have said that he threw himself on the grenade because he wanted to save the lives of others or because it was his duty. He would deny as ridiculous the claim that he acted in his self-interest. The psychological egoist might reply that the soldier is lying or self-deceived. Perhaps he threw himself on the grenade because he could not bear to live with himself afterwards if he did not do so. He has a better life, in terms of welfare, by avoiding years of guilt. The main problem here is that while this is a possible account of some cases, there is no reason to think it covers all cases. Another problem is that guilt may presuppose that the soldier has a non-self-regarding desire for doing what he takes to be right. Egoist are very greedy and try to get things anyway they can, even if it's inconvenient for others. The questions and comments of an Egoist: What's in it for me? How will it benefit me? Yuck! He looks hideous and makes me feel bad. I should help him to make me feel better. The questions and comments of an Altruist: How can I help you? Anyway I can assist, let me know. Poor man, he must feel awful. I've got to help him so he feels...
Words: 261 - Pages: 2
