DEFINITIONS
Definitions
Psychological Egoism (PE)
Definition: The descriptive claim that humans are always motivated by self-interest, even when they appear to act altruistically.
Key point: PE is about what people do, not about what they should do. It is a descriptive theory of human behavior.
Example: A person donates to charity because it makes them feel good, reduces guilt, or brings some personal satisfaction.
Ethical Egoism (EE)
Definition: The normative claim that humans ought to act in their own self-interest.
Key point: EE is about what is morally right, not just what people do. It is a prescriptive theory of morality.
Example: EE would argue that it is morally correct to pursue actions that maximize your own long-term well-being, even if that sometimes benefits others indirectly.
Altruism
Definition: The concern for, or actions taken to benefit, the well-being of others, often at some cost to oneself.
Key point: Altruism is the moral or behavioral opposite of egoism. In its purest form, altruism motivates actions primarily for the good of others, not for self-interest.
Example: Volunteering to rescue someone in danger, even if it puts your own safety at risk.
Is–Ought Distinction
Definition: The philosophical principle, articulated by David Hume, that one cannot derive a moral “ought” solely from a descriptive “is.”
Relevance: Just because psychological egoism is true (humans always act in self-interest) does not logically imply that ethical egoism is morally required.
Egoism vs. Egotism
Egoism: Rational self-interest; pursuing one’s own well-being while potentially respecting others.
Egotism: Selfishness or concern for oneself at the expense of others.
Relevance: Ethical egoism encourages egoism, not necessarily egotism.
THE ARGUMENTS
CLAIM: If psychological egoism is true then the moral theory of ethical egoism is also true. Though it is true that ethical egoism does not require belief in psychological egoism, it is true that psychological egoism demands belief in ethical egoism. If we can’t be other than self-interested then it follows that we ought to be self-interested for we cannot do anything different
CORRECTION: That is the is gives rise to an ought fallacy. Psychological egoism does not demand belief in ethical egoism. Ethical egoism is a response to it. Our response. The flu does not demand the medicine. It only happens that the medicine has to be considered.
Interestingly, if Godm or something else, were the ground of morality and made us as psychological egoists, then psychological egoism would demand acceptance of ethical egoism. But it contradicts the Christian claim that God made us for his own glory and in his own image as servant of all.
CLAIM: But even if altruism is possible, the ethical egoist says that egoism is right - it is what ought to be lived. Ethical egoism is bad. It says that Hitler didn’t do wrong by hurting the Jews but by degrading himself to do such things. Had he been a man with good self-esteem and self-respect he wouldn’t have carried out such actions. He didn’t have a strong and noble ego. He didn’t see that to love himself properly he had to love other people.
CORRECTION: Even if ethical egoism is indeed bad, that does not give anybody the right to condemn psychological egoism. Just because a truth has bad results doesn’t mean it is not a truth. The logic in the argument is otherwise correct.
There is nothing wrong with saying Hitler should have used his ego or self-esteem to appreciate other people. He did not make his ego and had to live with it. It went in a very misguided self-destructive direction.
If we are naturally egoists, it seems mistaken to say we should be ethical egoists for we have no choice but to be egoists. Unless you believe that free will is an illusion, we do have a choice. The choice is between egoism (self-interest) and egotism (selfishness).
Ethical egoism when correctly understood, tells you that you find your happiness in helping others. Virtue is its own reward. The egoist wants others to be self-interested all the time but in the wisest way for that benefits all.
Ethical egoism does not say that there is necessarily a conflict between my happiness and that of others. If I am truly well-balanced, I will make others happier which in turn makes me feel safer and makes me happier. If altruism were true, it would tell me to welcome suffering to help others. That can only make me fear goodness and others. It takes away my sense of safety.
Does the egoist assume that her or his interests come before everybody else’s? Is that not her or him claiming to matter more than other people - even if he or she treats others in an excellent way all the time? This would be the case if the egoist only helped the sick in order to feel good afterwards. But if the egoist finds joy and fulfilment in simply doing the act regardless of what may come after be it happiness or disappointment the egoist in practice is treating others as equals. He might not be able to think it but who cares? The person who refuses to take what is best in life to let others have it is still putting his or her own interests first in her or his own way. It depends on what he or she wants out of life.
The advice problem. Egoist John wants you to give him a loan. You are an egoist too and don’t want to give the loan. He can’t advise you to not give the loan for it is best for him if you do. He does therefore ethical egoism is untrue.
The solution to the problem is that John will feel he demeans himself if he gets the loan against your will. He wants to honour himself by doing the right thing. It is egoistic to honour yourself.