Egoism And Ethical Egoism

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 conflicts with ethical altruism, which states that moral agents have an obligation to help anyone but themselves. Egoism and altruism both conflict with ethical utilitarianism, which claims that an individual should not treat themselves with higher regard than they have for others as egoism instructs, by elevating ones own self-interests and "the self" to a status not shared with others. But it also goes without saying that one should not sacrifice their own interests to help another fulfill their interests, as long as one's own interests are considerably comparable to the other person’s interests and own 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 forms of consequentialism which is subject-focused or subjectively based. However, utilitarianism is held to be a neutral position, it does not treat the subject's own self-interests as being more or less important than the interests, desires, or well-being of other individuals.

Ethical egoism does not involve individuals to harm the interests and well-being of others when making decisions; what is in an individual's self-interest may be coincidently detrimental, beneficial, or neutral in its effect on others. Individualism allows for others' interest and well-being to be disregarded or not, as long as what is chosen is e...

... middle of paper ...

...he writes, "the purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer and die, but to enjoy yourself and live."[]

All of our frequently accepted moral obligations, not harming others, always speaking the truth and keeping promises, are all derived from the one fundamental standard of self-interest.

It has been observed, however, that the very act of eating, especially when there are starving people in the world would be considered an act of discrimination. Ethical egoists who readily accept the value of others to an individual, and who readily empathize for others, have debated the exact opposite from Rachels, that it is altruism that discriminates: "If the sensation of eating a cake is a value, then why is it an immoral indulgence in your stomach, but a moral goal for you to achieve in the stomach of others?"[] It is therefore altruism which is the illogical position.