Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An Essay on Professional Ethics
Short note on professional ethics
Fairly equal distribution of wealth
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: An Essay on Professional Ethics
While turning to any news source can provide a plethora of stories showing individuals in professions who put their self-interest ahead of everything else, there are also numerous stories showing the opposite. I don’t believe that self-interest and altruism are mutually exclusive in professions, much less the world at large. In fact, it is their balance, or imbalance, that makes up society. According to Merriam Webster, self-interest is defined as “a concern for one’s own advantage and well-being;” whereas, altruism is “unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others.” While the definitions are obviously opposites of each other, they can and do exist simultaneously in everyone. Individuals must strive to keep both sides in check …show more content…
Martin argues this point, stating that, according to Adam Smith, while most likely unintentional, some merchants seek to please customers by benefiting the community in order to increase satisfaction and therefore gain sales (pg. 12) or the rich provide jobs for the poor who need them, thereby distributing wealth (pg. 15). While obviously not an exact science, individuals must consistently seek to moderate between the two sides to keep the marketplace free and energized. David Landes (in Dawson, 2004) suggests that, historically, free enterprise is the most successful driver of wealth creation and, above that, it may also provide “all manner of social advantage within the company, community, and home country.” Dawson (2004) goes on to highlight these advantages include investments in community programs, impetus for social change, a tax base that can be used for public works, education funding, and support for democracy (e.g., freedom from totalitarian …show more content…
Self-interest, left unchecked can develop into greed – “a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (such as money) than is needed” (Merriam Webster online, n.d.). However, as long as it’s moderated, I don’t believe self-interest is necessarily a bad thing. Similar to the examples above, one can be motivated by money – but still do good… intentionally. Individuals who seek to make more money honestly in order to support their family and provide a certain standard of living (i.e., a good, comfortable home, education, enriching experiences, etc.), cannot be lumped in with someone who crosses the line into fraud just to have more. It’s also easier to be generous and give to deserving causes with one’s income when one has more it. Conversely, as Martin points out, “when money is the exclusive motive, work usually fails to be intrinsically satisfying” (pg. 24). In fact, Martin (pg. 16) suggests that compartmentalizing either inclination can lead to harmful side effects to
In the Humanistic Tradition the author, Gloria Fiero introduces Adam smith as a Scottish moral philosopher, pioneer of political economy, and a key figure in the Scottish Enlightenment. Smith also known as the Father of Political economy, is best known for one of his two classic works An Inquiry into the nature and causes of the Wealth of Nations. Fiero looks at Smith’s work because the division of labor is important. One thing Smith thinks is even more important for creating a wealthy nation, is to interact and have open trade with different countries. Fiero states,“It is necessary, though very slow and gradual, consequence of a certain propensity in human nature which has in view no such extensive utility; the propensity to truck, barter,
One day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is not a book about a superhuman. It is not a story about someone who is weaker and more desperate than everyone else. It is not a tale of greatness, nor is it about extraordinary faults. Instead, Aleksander Solzhenitsyn chose to center his story around Ivan denisovich Shukhov, an average, unnoticeable Russian prisoner.
Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations as a guide why economics should be catered to benefit both the business as well as the consumer. While Smith stresses the importance of d...
In the “Gospel of wealth”, Andrew Carnegie argues that it is the duty of the wealthy entrepreneur who has amassed a great fortune during their lifetime, to give back to those less fortunate. Greed and selfishness may force some readers to see these arguments as preposterous; however, greed is a key ingredient in successful competition. It forces competitors to perform at a higher level than their peers in hopes of obtaining more money and individual wealth. A capitalist society that allows this wealth to accumulate in the hands of the few might be beneficial to the human race because it could promote competition between companies; it might ensure health care for everyone no matter their social standing, and parks and recreation could be built for the enjoyment of society.
The behavior of altruism in an individual is when it brings more costs than benefits for the benefit of another individual. Altruism comes from the Latin word "Alter" which means "the others." This translation of alturism describes it relatively well. Another great definition of altruism can be found in a statement of Edward Osborne Wilson, an American biologist. According to Wilson, "Altruism is defined in biology, as in everyday life, as a self-destructive
When pondering the meaning of life, participating in altruistic deeds is, in my opinion the most sensible way to carry out a meaningful life. Altruism is defined as helping others to lead a good life with out too much suffering. Altruism falls under the category of optimism, but is still a realistic belief. In order to prove altruism is the best argument for the meaning of life I will need to prove that it is a credible argument and also discredit the objections and show why they are incorrect. I will respond to various objections to the claim that carrying out altruistic deeds will lead to a meaningful life, including objections presented by Baggini.
Psychological egoism, a descriptive claim about human nature, states that humans by nature are motivated only by self-interest. To act in one's self-interest is to act mainly for one's own good and loving what is one's own (i.e. ego, body, family, house, belongings in general). It means to give one's own interests higher priority then others'. "It (psychological egoism) claims that we cannot do other than act from self-interest motivation, so that altruism-the theory that we can and should sometimes act in favor of others' interests-is simply invalid because it's impossible" (Pojman 85). According to psychological egoists, any act no matter how altruistic it might seem, is actually motivated by some selfish desire of the agent (i.e., desire for reward, avoidance of guilt, personal happiness).
The pivotal second chapter of Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, "Of the Principle which gives occasion to the Division of Labour," opens with the oft-cited claim that the foundation of modern political economy is the human "propensity to truck, barter, and exchange one thing for another."1 This formulation plays both an analytical and normative role. It offers an anthropological microfoundation for Smith's understanding of how modern commercial societies function as social organizations, which, in turn, provide a venue for the expression and operation of these human proclivities. Together with the equally famous concept of the invisible hand, this sentence defines the central axis of a new science of political economy designed to come to terms with the emergence of a novel object of investigation: economic production and exchange as a distinct, separate, independent sphere of human action. Moreover, it is this domain, the source of wealth, which had become the main organizational principle of modern societies, displacing the once-ascendant positions of theology, morality, and political philosophy.
First of all, there is a term closely followed with self-interest as we mention, “collective interest” or “altruism”, which means that, “Looking out for other’s welfare.” (Hospers, 39) Analogously, it is totally opposite from the idea of self-interest. Common sense always recognizes that the collective is more important than the individual. A country, which is formed by plenty people, so is more significant than a person. Collective interest has bigger influence than self-interest to the society, as the founder of utilitarianism Jeremy Bentham stated, “Personal pleasure and pain are dependent on the general happiness and prosperity of the whole community.” (Fagothey, 63) and “The greatest happiness of the greatest number.” (Fagothey, 63) As if people only are allowed to serve the community rather individual. However, I strongly disagree with it and believe they forget a truth that the whole unity consists of many small parts.
How do humans actually behave when faced with the decision to help others? The innate desire that compels humans to help is called altruism by psychologists. Through this feeling, humans transform from a selfish jerk to a more compassionate and caring person. Some psychologists believe that this feeling stems from nature itself. Despite the fact that some altruistic acts originate from the pressures of society, altruism predominantly comes from the survival of the fittest, the feeling of empathy, and the selfish desire to benefit your own kin.
Individuals differ in many ways, including their commitment, ambition, and ingenuity. In a market-oriented economy, individuals move freely between classes contingent on their ability to satiate the desires of others; thus, an economic hierarchy is created, and those who better satisfy consumers wants will make more money. This income inequality provides a greater ability and incentive to produce wealth. By establishing these clear-cut classes, it becomes apparent these individuals are in fact unequal. By nature, consumers purchase goods from suppliers who outperformed their competitors. In a society based on voluntary trade, a person grows rich by producing goods and getting people to purchase those products over the alternatives available.
Adam smith argues that the amount of labor used in production of a commodity determines its exchange value in a primitive society; however, this changes in an advanced society where the exchange value now includes the profit for the owner of capital.
Self-interest should not be confused with selfishness, as the two terms are neither interchangeable nor synonymous. Self-interest is “concern for one’s own advantage and well-being,” and selfishness is extreme self-interest coupled with a disregard for others (Merriam-Webster). It comes in several forms, like economic and political, and is specialized according to each nation and its individual wants and needs. In fact, it is not only possible but actually c...
Capitalism allows people to have rights to own assets, causing companies to respond to these demands and immediately produce products for consumers. As this demand increases, more businesses join the market to compete against each other for all the consumer’s money. This competition between businesses is beneficial for people as companies will require more workers and inevitably pay them a sustainable wage. As a result of competition being the underlying function of capitalism, companies are required to produce goods that consumers will invest in (Spark, 2018). Therefore, products are only made if they provide any form of benefit or interest to the consumers, otherwise the product won’t sell, and no profit will be made.
The debate is divided in two camps. The supporters of the first idea claim that by doing good business, the economy as a whole benefits without the need to donate or contribute in distinct ways to the community. The second idea is that businesses should behave in such a way to create an environment where everyone should use its power to help out the community.