Psychological and Ethical Egoism

Three Arguments against Ethical Egoism - The Argument That Ethical Egoism Cannot Provide Solutions for Conflict of Interests

Kurt Baier: - Ethical Egoism cannot be correct because it cannot provide solutions for conflicts of interest. - we need moral rules only because our interests sometimes come into conflict. - ethical Egoism does not help to resolve conflicts of interest; it only exacerbates them. - on this view, the moralist is not like a courtroom judge, who resolves disputes. Instead, he is like the Commissioner of Boxing, who urges each fighter to do his best.

Ethical Egoism as Compatible with Commonsense Morality. PROBLEMS:

At best, it shows only that as a general rule it is to one's own advantage to avoid harming others. It does not show that this is always so. - not all our moral obligations can be explained as derivable from self-interest. A demonstration that one could derive this duty from self-interest does not prove that self-interest is the only reason one has this duty. Only if you accept an additional proposition-namely, that there is no reason for giving other than self-interest-will you find Ethical Egoism a plausible theory.

The Deepest Error in Psychological Egoism

Attraction to the Theory: - theoretical simplicity. - a hardheaded, deflationary attitude toward human pretensions; the theory's cynical view of human nature. Deeper reason: - Psychological Egoism was accepted by many thinkers because it appeared to them to be irrefutable. Yet in another sense, the theory's immunity from refutation is its deepest flaw. - once a hypothesis is accepted, everything may be interpreted to support it. The psychological egoist has only announced his determination to interpret people's behavior in a certain way, no matter what they do. - nothing that anyone could do could possibly count as evidence against the hypothesis. - the thesis is irrefutable, but for that very reason it turns out to have no factual content. - if we do not allow someway in which we might be mistaken, we lose all chance of being right.

Ethical Egoism is an arbitrary doctrine, in the same way that racism is arbitrary. The argument, then, is this:

(1) Any moral doctrine that assigns greater importance to the interests of one group than to those of another is unacceptably arbitrary unless there is some difference between the members of the groups that justifies treating them differently. (2) Ethical Egoism would have each person assign greater importance to his or her own interests than to the interests of others. But there is no general difference between oneself and others, to which each person can appeal, that justifies this difference in treatment. (3) Therefore, Ethical Egoism is unacceptably arbitrary. We should care about the interests of other people for the same reason we care about our own interests; for their needs and desires are comparable to our own.

Ethical Egoism - Spelled Out

(1) We ought to do whatever will best promote everyone's interests. (2) The best way to promote everyone's interests is for each of us to pursue our own interests exclusively. (3) Therefore, each of us should pursue our own interests exclusively. If we accept this reasoning, then we are not Ethical Egoists.

Ayn Rand's Argument Summary

(I) A person has only one life to live. If we value the individual - that is, if the individual has moral worth - we must agree that this life is of supreme importance. After all, it is all one has, and all one is. (2) The ethics of altruism regards the life of the individual as something one must be ready to sacrifice for the good of others. (3) Therefore, the ethics of altruism does not take seriously the value of the human individual. (4) Ethical Egoism, which allows each person to view his or her own life as being of ultimate value, does take the human individual seriously-it is, in fact, the only philosophy that does so. (5) Thus, Ethical Egoism is the philosophy that ought to be accepted.

Is Unselfishness Possible? Psychological Egoism

- WE ARE NOT CAPABLE OF UNSELFISHNESS. - human nature being what it is, people will respond to the needs of others only when there is something in it for themselves. Pure altruism is a myth-it simply does not exist. - it is an illusion that we care about each other.

The Strategy of Reinterpreting Motives - Psychological Egoism

- altruistic explanations of behavior are superficial. - it may seem that people are unselfish, but a deeper analysis of their motives might tell a different story. - for any act of apparent altruism, a way can always be found to eliminate the altruism in favor of some more self-centered motive. - it is not a conclusive method of reasoning, for it cannot prove that Psychological Egoism is correct. - it only shows that it is possible to interpret motives egoistically; it does nothing to show that the egoistic motives are deeper or truer than the altruistic explanations they are intended to replace.

Two Arguments in Favor of Psychological Egoism - The Argument That We Always Do What Makes Us Feel Good

- appeals to the fact that so-called altruistic actions produce a sense of self-satisfaction in the person who performs them. - acting "unselfishly" makes people feel good about themselves, and that is the real point of it. - this sense of self-satisfaction is a pleasant state of consciousness which we desire and seek. Therefore, actions are "unselfish" only at a superficial level of analysis. - isn't the unselfish person the one who does derive satisfaction from helping others, whereas the selfish person does not? - pleasure in assisting others is the mark of unselfishness, not selfishness. - if someone desires the welfare and happiness of other people, she will derive satisfaction from helping them; but this does not mean that those good feelings are the object of her desire.

Two Arguments in Favor of Psychological Egoism - The Argument That We Always Do What We Want to Do

- dictated by his own desires, his own sense of what he wants most. Thus he cannot be acting unselfishly. Flaws: a. it rests on the premise that people never voluntarily do anything except what they want to do. But this is plainly false. Someone may do something because she has promised to do it, and thus feels obligated, even though she does not want to do it. We feel a conflict because we do not want to do what we feel obligated to do. b. What else could unselfishness be, if not wanting to help others, even at some cost to oneself? It is the object of a want that determines whether it is selfish or not. The mere fact that I am acting on my wants does not mean that I am acting selfishly; it depends on what it is that I want. If I want only my own good and care nothing for others, then I am selfish; but if I also want other people to be happy, and I act on that desire, then I am not selfish.

Three Arguments in Favor of Ethical Egoism - Ayn Rand's Argument

- ethical Egoism, in her view, is the only ethical philosophy that respects the integrity of the individual human life. - the ethics of "altruism" is a destructive idea, both in society as a whole and in the lives of individuals taken in by it. - "if a man accepts the ethics of altruism, his first concern is not how to live his life, but how to sacrifice it." - suggests that there is a metaphysical basis for egoistic ethics. It is the only ethics that takes seriously the reality of the individual person. What of the starving people? It might be argued, in response, that Ethical Egoism "reveals a mind from which the reality of a human being has been wiped out"-namely, the human being who is starving. - the problem with this argument, as you may already have noticed, is that it relies on picturing the alternatives in such an extreme way. - even if we should reject the extreme "ethics of altruism," it does not follow that one must accept the other extreme of Ethical Egoism.

Difference between psychological and ethical egoism

- ethical egoism claims that each person ought to pursue his or her own self-interest exclusively. - psychological egoism asserts that each person does in fact pursue his or her own self-interest exclusively. - psychological Egoism makes a claim about human nature, or about the way things are; - ethical egoism makes a claim about morality, or about the way things should be.

Three Arguments against Ethical Egoism - The Argument That Ethical Egoism Is Logically Inconsistent. Contradiction.

- ethical egoism leads to logical contradictions. - if this is true, then Ethical Egoism is indeed a mistaken theory, for no theory can be true if it is self-contradictory. (1) Suppose it is each person's duty to do what is in his own best interests. (2) It is in B's best interest to liquidate K. (3) It is in K's best interest to prevent B from liquidating him. (4) Therefore B's duty is to liquidate K, and K's duty is to prevent B from doing it. (5) But it is wrong to prevent someone from doing his duty. (6) Therefore it is wrong for K to prevent B from liquidating him. (7) Therefore it is both wrong and not wrong for K to prevent B from liquidating him. (8) But no act can be both wrong and not wrong; that is a self-contradiction. (9) Therefore the assumption with which we started that it is each person's duty to do what is in his own best interests cannot be true. Whether one ought to prevent someone from doing his duty depends entirely on whether it would be to one's own advantage to do so. Regardless of whether we think this is a correct view, it is, at the very least, a consistent view, and so this attempt to convict the egoist of self-contradiction fails.

Three Arguments in Favor of Ethical Egoism - Ethical Egoism as Compatible with Commonsense Morality.

- it is possible to interpret Ethical Egoism as a theory that accepts commonsense morality. - Ethical Egoism would be the theory that all our duties are ultimately derived from the one fundamental principle of self-interest. 1. The duty not to harm others: it is to our own advantage to avoid harming others. 2. The duty not to lie: If we lie to other people, we will suffer all the ill effects of a bad reputation. It is to our own advantage to be truthful. 3. The duty to keep our promises: It is to our own advantage to be able to enter into mutually beneficial arrangements with other people. Thomas Hobbes suggested that the principle of Ethical Egoism leads to nothing less than the Golden Rule: We should "do unto others" because if we do, others will be more likely to "do unto us."

Three Arguments against Ethical Egoism - The Argument That Ethical Egoism Is Unacceptably Arbitrary

- it provides some insight into why the interests of other people should matter to us. - We can justify treating people differently only if we can show that there is some factual difference between them that is relevant to justifying the difference in treatment. - racism is an arbitrary doctrine, in that it advocates treating people differently even though there are no differences between them to justify it. - ethical egoism is a moral theory of the same type. It advocates that each of us divide the world into 2 categories of people-ourselves and all the rest-and that we regard the interests of those in the 1st group as more important than the interests of those in the 2nd group.

Psychological Egoism

- not a theory of ethics but a theory of human psychology. - if Psychological Egoism were true, then moral philosophy itself would seem pointless. - if people are going to behave selfishly no matter what, then what's the point of discussing what they "ought" to do? - morality and psychology go together. - morality tells us what we ought to do; but there is little point to it if we are not able to do as we ought. - a sound morality must be based on a realistic conception of what is possible' for human beings.

Ethical Egoism Theory

- the idea that each person ought to pursue his or her own self-interest exclusively. - a normative theory or a theory about how we ought to behave. - we have no duty except to do what is best for ourselves. - does NOT say that one should promote one's own interests as well as the interests of others. - is the radical view that one's only duty is to promote one's own interests. - there is only one ultimate principle of conduct, the principle of self-interest, and this principle sums up all of one's natural duties and obligations. - does NOT tell you to avoid helping others. Sometimes your interests will coincide with the wellbeing of others, so by helping yourself you'll help them too. - does NOT imply that in pursuing your interests, you should always do what you want to, or what offers you the most short-term pleasure. - person ought to do what really is in his or her own best interests, over the long run. It endorses selfishness, not foolishness.

Ethical Egoism - Is There a Duty to Contribute for Famine Relief?

- we could forgo our luxuries and give the money for famine relief instead. - the starving people are dying at some distance from us; we do not see them and we can avoid even thinking of them. - morality requires that we balance our own interests against the interests of others. - commonsense morality would say that you should give the money for famine relief rather than spending it on the movies. - we have "natural" duties to others simply because they are people who could be helped or harmed by our actions.

Clearing Away Some Confusions - Psychological Egoism

- when we set out to explain something, we would like to find as simple an explanation as possible. - when we think about human conduct, we would like to find one principle that explains it all. 1. Confusion between selfishness and self-interest: - selfish behavior is behavior that ignores the interests of others, in circumstances in which their interests ought not to be ignored. - to call people selfish is not just to describe their action but to criticize it. - you would not be called selfish for eating a normal meal in normal circumstances (although this would surely be in your self-interest); but you would be called selfish for hoarding food while others are starving. 2. Confusion between self-interested behavior and the pursuit of pleasure. - we do lots of things because we enjoy them, but that does not mean we are acting from self-interest. - undisciplined pleasure seeking and acting from self-interest are very different. - it is false that all actions are selfish and that all actions are done from self-interest. 3. The common but false assumptions that a concern for one's own welfare is incompatible with any genuine concern for others. Sometimes we are able to promote the welfare of others when our own interests are not involved at all. Once these confusions are cleared away, there seems little reason to think Psychological Egoism is a plausible theory.

Hobbes view of Psychological Egoism - Reinterpreting Motives

1. Charity - the charitable man is demonstrating to himself, and to the world, that he is more capable than others. He is really just showing off his own superiority. We are not the best judge of our own motivations. This provides the real explanation of why we do what we do. 2. Pity - the reason we are disturbed by other people's misfortunes is that we are reminded that the same thing might happen to us. "imagination or fiction of future calamity to ourselves, proceeding from the sense of another man's calamity." It can explain why we feel greater pity when a good person suffers than when an evil person suffers. "I pity you when I imagine myself in your place."

Three Arguments in Favor of Ethical Egoism - The Argument That Altruism Is Self-Defeating

The first argument has several variations, each suggesting the same general point: 1. Each of us is intimately familiar with our own individual wants and needs. At the same time, we understand the desires and needs of other people only imperfectly, and we are not well situated to pursue them. If we try to be "our brother's keeper," we will often bungle the job and end up doing more harm than good. 2. The policy of "looking out for others" is an offensive intrusion into other people's privacy; it is a policy of minding other people's business. 3. Making other people the object of one's "charity" is degrading to them; it robs them of their dignity and self-respect. That is why the recipients of "charity" are often resentful rather than appreciative. *if each person looks after his or her own interests, everyone will be better off.