Egoistic Approach To Virtue Ethics

“People act for many reasons; but for whom, or what, do or should they act—for themselves, for God, or for the good of the planet?” (Moseley) An egoist would argue that one acts for one’s own self. More specifically, an ethical egoist is one who thrives to improve ones own self being, with much respect to morality. Ethical Egoism is the theory that one should pursue his or her own interest above all the rest. It is the idea that all persons should act from their own self interest in relation to morality.

The following paper will investigate whether it is moral or immoral to apply strong affirmative action programs at Lethbridge College in attempts to increase the representation of male registered nurses. Further investigation into the topic will be done through the application of ethical egoism and the ethics of care.

In this paper I will argue that ethical egoism is untrue because it fails to show all sides of human motivation. In order to comprehend the fault of ethical egoism I think that it is important to state its foundation. Ethical egoism is a moral theory. Moral theories fundamentally deal with which actions are right and which actions are wrong. (Shafer-Landau, Russ. "Chapter 8." The Fundamentals of Ethics.) Ethical egoism expresses that everyone ought to or should look out for themselves and their own best interests. It goes on to say the only time a person should help others is when it will advance themselves later on. With this theory, in a conflict people should not compromise but only work toward their own self-interests. Ethical egoism is

Utilitarianism determines the ethicality of an act based on the likelihood that it will produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The goal of this doctrine is to maximize overall utility. Moral acts increase happiness and minimize suffering from the perspective of a utilitarian. Because the future is always uncertain, it can be difficult to know if the consequences of the acts will bring happiness or suffering. This uncertainty is a fallback of utilitarianism, but when judging the morality of an outcome, only the likely consequences

Of the Ethical theories, Utilitarianism is the strongest because it utilizes empathy in the search for eliminating suffering, is not absolutist, and that it does not defer to God’s will. Utilitarianism was first formulated early on by Epicurus in his philosophy, Epicureanism, and then elaborated on later by his Contemporaries Frances Hutcheson, David Hume, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, and John Stuart Mill. These Ethical Theorists focused on the idea of having the law serve, rather than hinder, human interests, rather than having humans serve the law’s interest. Louis Pojman describes Utilitarianism as the following in his book How Should We Live?: “The theory that the right action is one that maximizes utility….

Both egoism and utilitarianism are theories of normative ethics, which provides a system of rules for determining what one should and should not do from a moral perspective. Using these two theories, we can compare and contrast how each would respond to the moral issue in which academically failing school districts across Ohio removed students from the attendance roles in an effort to improve test scores. in order to ensure continued funding and accreditation in their districts.

The first principle is that when people make decisions they are to be ethical and to consider both the consequences and the intentions of our actions. With Kant, the take away is that individuals are to be concerned with the right intentions as well as the right principles. Kant also describes that “Everything in nature works according to laws” (Twenty Questions, page 595). The Utilitarian Argument poses that there are for steps: “recognize the problem, consider options and consequences, and select the outcome” (TJ Consequences Outline, 2017). In Kant’s Utilitarian View individuals are to add up the good and bad consequences and subtract the bad consequences from the good consequences. This will then lead to an overall choice. After reading the article “Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals,” I find that Immanuel Kant suggests that people should be treated as “ends” rather than “means.” People deserve respect and everyone has value therefore life is worth living. Kant’s prospective is widely based on practical reason rather than the focus of feelings. From what I understand from Kant, life is worth living but it is widely based on the aspect that everything is based on a fundamental law.

For the West, Aristotle and Plato are said to be the founders of Virtue Ethics. Plato’s cardinal virtues are: the courage (the heart, the soldier) is the virtue of the spirited or passionate or emotional aspect of humans, sensuous (the body, the worker) appetite the virtue is temperance, and reason (the mind, the philosopher king) is the great virtue that makes us dignified and distinctively human. If all these virtues are well developed and balanced, we have a just human being and justice in society or the republic. (McKinney, pg.93). Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics offer insightful perspectives on proper action and virtue that is rooted in ancient Greek philosophy and remains relevant in our modern world.

Without a distinct framework, ethical egoism fails as a moral theory to assist moral decision making because it endorses the animalistic nature of humanity, fails to provide a viable solution to a conflict of interest, and is proved to be an evolutionary unstable moral strategy.

Ethical egoism is a position according to which every person takes care of themselves. According to ethical egoists, personal welfare should be the ultimate goal and as such, solely and exclusively focus on pursuit of self-interests. It prescribes a way in which people ought to behave morally. It also argues that maximization of personal interest is an important issue. Other people 's welfare does not matter when making a moral judgment about how to behave. However, this principle does not provide a satisfactory moral theory in its arguments.

Ethical Egoism, Ethical Altruism, and Eudaimonia are terms adversely mentioned, and used interchangeably, especially in the philosophical field. From a philosophical angle, egoism can take the descriptive or the normative perspective. While taking the ethical egoism angle, the source highlights that for a particular action, it must adhere to the moral requirements to the extent that there is no depriving of the individual’s self-interests. With regards to ethical altruism, there is the tendency to be inclined to a behavior that has high intentions of ensuring that there is the garnering of benefits to the other person for the purpose of this other person’s welfare (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy n.p.). The chapter 5 (115) observes

Virtue, when I hear that word I think of value and morality and only good people can be virtuous. When I hear the word ethics I think of good versus evil, wrong and right. Now when the two are put together you get virtue ethics. You may wonder what can virtue ethics possibly mean. It’s just two words put together to form some type of fancy theory. Well this paper will discuss virtue ethics and the philosophy behind it.

Descriptive egoism holds that for each individual, there is only one ultimate aim survival and the betterment of the sole individual based on their own hierarchical principles.

The choices we make in life are guided by ethical theories we adhere to. Utilitarianism and Kantian ethics are two systems that provide a way to approach life decisions, big and small. Utilitarianism, nicknamed “The Greatest Happiness” states that the ethical choice is the choice that yields the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people. Kantian ethics, also called duty ethics, explains that for any action, people must act according to common principles, with no significance placed on the outcome. The ethical theories, utilitarianism and Kantian ethics both promote objective good but differ greatly in the process for evaluating the morality of our actions.

Ethics is the name for the moral principles which control an individual’s behaviour. Ethics is also known as moral philosophy, which is the discipline concerned with what is morally right and wrong. In my assignment I will look into how a Utilitarian and a Kantian react to a specific scenario, seeing how both perspectives differ and deciding which one is better in the given scenario. Utilitarianism is the theory in normative ethics that believes the best action is the one which provides the most happiness. This is known as the Greatest Happiness Principle, the belief that the less pain an act produces, the more morally praiseworthy that action will be. Kantianism on the other hand is the belief of Emmanuel Kant, asserting that the act