Psychological Egoism Theory Essay

2108 Words 9 Pages
The theory of psychological egoism is indeed plausible. The meaning of plausible in the context of this paper refers to the validity or the conceivability of the theory in question, to explain the nature and motivation of human behavior (Hinman, 2007). Human actions are motivated by the satisfaction obtained after completing a task that they are involved in. For example, Mother Teresa was satisfied by her benevolent actions and activities that she spent her life doing. As Hinman (2007) points out, she was likely to reduce in activity if she experienced any dissatisfaction in her endeavors.
Therefore, no matter how much altruism theorists try to argue about the degree of inclination of an action towards non self-interest,
…show more content…
In his argument, Hinman (2007) asserts that every action that people engage in is motivated by self-interests or pleasure or direct benefits the agent or to avoid living with guilt in the future. This is the nature of human beings. Even the most altruistic action is in actual sense motivated by the egocentric desire of the actor (Hugh, 1898).
Hugh (1898) further argues that people recognize that they are motivated, in most if not all cases by their need to advance their self-interest. However, when they reflect on this issue, they are mistaken by the urge to believe that the truth is the centrally of this. Actions that are meant to show concern for other people, such as helping the needy are self-satisfying to the actor, and they expect that they will their reputation in the society and obtain returned favors. A good example is that of political aspirant who might engage in a lot of philanthropic activities in his community to win the support of his constituents.

Helping people is a noble thing to do especially when it comes to the application of natural justice, where human beings help those who are suffering. There is always a hidden intention in every action that is obscured by the notion of philanthropy. Returned favors expectation might not be the ultimate intention as to why people may perform an act (Michael, 1978). However, it will be illogical to say that these intentions were