Picture yourself strolling down a bustling street, when suddenly you encounter an elderly lady grappling with numerous bags. Regrettably, the handles on her bags snap, leading to her possessions scattering all over the pavement. While others merely glance at the predicament without extending any assistance, you opt to halt and aid in collecting everything back together. Appreciative of your support, she gazes at you and expresses her gratitude with a heartfelt “Thank you.” In return, you reciprocate her smile and resume your walk, experiencing an elevation in self-confidence simply because you decided to pause and lend a helping hand.
While some people believe it is morally acceptable to prioritize our own well-being, I disagree and argue that this perspective is misguided. Ethical egoism, unlike psychological egoism, stresses the importance of acting in our rational self-interest. According to ethical egoism, we should make choices that ultimately benefit our personal well-being. For example, an ethical egoist acknowledges the importance of going to the dentist for a cavity removal despite any discomfort it may cause as it can prevent more severe pain in the future.
The essay aims to analyze ethical egoism, addressing arguments both for and against this theory. It emphasizes the importance of recognizing the individuality of others and how our actions can affect them positively or negatively. Consequently, if an action has the potential to benefit someone else, it becomes a motive for aiding them. Although ethical egoism suggests that morality originates from self-interest, I personally maintain a different viewpoint and believe that considering the well-being of others is crucial in terms of ethics.
Altruism argues for the importance of considering others’ interests and providing assistance from a moral standpoint. However, ethical egoists hold a contrary view, stating that individuals should prioritize and promote their own interests. Let’s first address the argument for altruism, which is based on three assumptions. Firstly, we lack awareness of others’ interests, making it challenging to effectively support them.
We are more capable of understanding our own interests, so helping others can intrude and imply their inability to self-care. Therefore, it is necessary to prioritize actions that equally benefit everyone. Additionally, if we each concentrate on pursuing our individual interests, it ultimately benefits others the most. Hence, it is advisable for each person to exclusively pursue their own interests. However, retaliation remains a direct reaction.
The main point being made is that the argument presented is not focused on selfishness, but rather on selflessness. It is important to acknowledge that while the conclusion suggests acting in a selfish manner, this conclusion is actually driven by altruism as stated in premise 1. Essentially, the argument proposes that in order to effectively practice altruism, it is necessary for everyone to act in their own self-interest. According to Thomas Hobbler’s argument, our moral intuitions can always be justified using ethical egoism. Certain actions like telling the truth and refraining from taking a life should be carried out because they ultimately serve our long-term interests.
Engaging in negative actions has a direct impact on us. It can cause others to be hesitant or even retaliate against us. Therefore, it is beneficial for our own well-being to avoid harming others. Additionally, if we choose to deceive others with lies, it will harm our credibility and encourage dishonesty towards us. Thus, being truthful benefits us personally.
Now, let’s consider egoism. It necessitates the belief that, from an individual’s standpoint, their own interests hold more significance than those of others. To validate this belief, we must identify distinct dissimilarities between the self and others. Otherwise, egoism would be indistinguishable from racism. However, an ethical egoist can argue that prioritizing our own interests above all else is actually in our own best interest. If everyone were to adopt this mindset, we would all be equally important.
Now, I am going to integrate an argument for ethical egoism that I learned in an economics class. It is called the invisible hand, which is an economic theory stating that we should anticipate a prosperous society from individuals motivated by profit and competing for business, as it is in their rational self-interest to do so. The invisible hand serves as an argument for ethical egoism, as it suggests that ethical egoism within a capitalistic economy ultimately results in prosperity.
Ethical egoism, supported by the invisible hand argument, justifies acting in self-interest and disregarding empathy. This theory is applicable in practical situations where everyday decision-making does not adhere to a comprehensive moral framework. However, it should be noted that this version of ethical egoism, endorsed by the “invisible hand,” does not advocate for empathy, altruism, or considering the well-being of others.
The passage discusses the promotion of self-interest driven by pure egoism, as opposed to selfishness. This type of egoism is deemed impractical and frequently results in harming others while seeking personal gains. It is also uncertain that there will never arise a circumstance where causing harm to others would not benefit our own self-interest. Whether advocating for solely pursuing one’s self-interest or embracing the belief in considering others’ needs as morally just, morality has always been a intricate topic.
From a young age, we are taught and inspired to maintain moral principles and abide by them in our lives. We seek out partners who also hold these values, passing them on to our children and shaping their ethical viewpoint. While ethical egoism may offer certain benefits, such as prioritizing one’s own interests, I personally do not endorse this perspective. Instead, I firmly advocate for altruism because even a single act of genuine selflessness can debunk ethical egoism.
