Rachel’s claim of ethical egoism is a normative view illustrating how men ought to act (Cahn, 2004, p.72). In most instances, they do things out of their ‘unselfish behavior’ and the arguments that arise from such happenings are twofold. First is that actions done voluntarily by an individual are done merely because the agent wants to do those things. This implies that their actions are unselfish and that at no point can an individual do things voluntarily. Patently, such arguments are false because the two classes of actions arising from such instances show that exceptions need to be made to such generalization. One set of action is where one does something as a means to an end; of something that needs to be achieved such as visiting a dentist to extract a tooth. Such a case is consistent with egoists arguments because the ends mentioned are that which an agent wanted to perform. The other set of actions is one that an agent feels obligated to do such as promising to do something.
Sympathy should be considered as a genuine feeling for an individual to be recognized as a man. It is similar to thinking that a man who derives satisfaction from helping others is selfish. This is not true because the unselfish man does indeed derive satisfaction from helping other people, while the selfish man does not derive any satisfaction. It should be noted that a selfish man is compassionate and good-hearted through all his actions because he sacrifices his time to help one who is in need. An individual who does things as a way of helping others most often cares for the other person and wants to see them succeed. Such concerns are what make an individual a reasonable man (Rachels, 2014).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Generally speaking, having a positive attitude towards goal attainment, then most definitely satisfaction will be derived from the attainment of the specified goal. However, since most individuals objectify the attainment of goal as their attitude; then they must first attain the goal before finding any satisfaction of performing the given action. Individuals always do not desire ‘‘pleasurable consciousness’’ of any sort when trying to figure out how to achieve a certain goal (Rachels, 2014). Rather, our desires are of all sorts of different things such as promotion in workplaces, money, and so on, therefore, we will derive satisfaction from attaining all these things. And so, the same applies to an individual who desires to see another person happy and wealth, they will derive satisfaction from that; but it does not mean that their satisfaction hails from their desire or that he is selfish in any way.
Ethical egoism continues to be a disturbing doctrine because people are often mistaken of having their own self-interest when doing something good for another individual. They are also mistaken to be motivated by factors such as self-regard, which is not true. The confusion that arises is that of selfishness being similar with self-interest. Take for instance an individual brushing his teeth are in his self-interest and is not a selfish conduct. The reason is because selfish behavior is one that ignores other people’s interest, especially in those circumstances where their interests ought not to be ignored (Cahn, 2004, p.76). The concept of ‘selfishness’ seems to have definite evaluative flavor because by calling someone ‘selfish’ his actions are being condemned. The second confusion is that all actions done are from self-interest or are from other-regarding motives. In such cases, egoists conclude that there is no such thing as genuine altruism, implying that all actions performed are from self-interest. The third confusion is that genuineness does not rhyme with the welfare of other people.
The ethical egoist will always look at his own interests and thus, thinks of himself in all he does hence, being kind and considerate is for one’s advantage when it comes to preserving a stable society. By so doing, the interests of people will be protected since the actions of the egoist’s dictates that he must encourage others to act benevolently. As such, his self-centered method of decision making needs to be concealed from the public because he needs others to be altruists (Rachels, 2014). Ethical egoism cannot be maintained as a consistent view with regards to people’s actions as it will result in inconsistencies. Therefore, egoists’ position should be interpreted in a sympathetic way by acknowledging that the egoist world exists that looks at maximizing his interests.
The policy of action when it concerns egoists is to bring about this sort of world regardless of the moral assumptions arising from such a world (Cahn, 2004, p.79). This means that the principles adopted in such a world would be altruistic. Deceitfulness will be key for egoists who aim at creating such a world and thus, they will be adopting the necessary means to achieve their goals. The inconsistency that comes into play is that the individual will be advocating for one thing, but will be doing the opposite. To an egoist, this becomes their means to an end and thus, does the rational thing on both ends. In summation, the arguments raised before are different as there is nothing that is inconsistent in the view of ethical egoists.
The challenge brought about by ethical egoism is towards ordinary moral convictions and the point that arises is the human welfare is valued by many for its own sake, not merely for something’s sake (Cahn, 2004, p.80). As such, the policies being pursued are meant for the good of human beings. Ethical egoist believes that reasons for action exist as being dependent on the prior existence of certain attitudes coming from the agent. Human misery from an egoist point of view is seen with complete indifference because he is not the one suffering. The feeling of sympathy is fundamental to human psychological makeup.
References
Cahn, M. (2004). Egoism and moral skepticism In A new introduction to philosophy (pp. 71-82).
Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers.
Rachels, J. (2014). The right thing to do: Basic reading in moral philosophy.
