Utilitarianism And Enlightened Egoism

     The descriptive claim made by Psychological Egoists is that humans, by nature, are motivated only by self-interest. Any act, no matter how altruistic it may seem on the outside is actually only a disguise for a selfish desire such as recognition, avoiding guilt, reward or sense of personal ‘goodness’ or morality. For example, Mother Teresa is just using the poor for her own long-term spiritual gain. Being a universal claim, it could falter with a single counterexample. And being that I believe this claim to be bunk I will tell you why!

The specific quote by Ayn Rand which states, “The proper method of judging when or whether one should help another person is by

Throughout society we have always been told to help those in need no matter what the situation might be. But these days it seems as if the only reason people help those in need is because they usually want something in return such as social approval and recognition for their help or if they don’t help they’ll face legal consequences due to their lack of action such as seeing crime occurring and not responding. According to Peter Singer we have a duty to render aid to others, and I agree with that because if that was you in that person’s position you would want someone to help you. The origin of this duty derives from our basic principles as humans to help those that need help if we have the ability to do so. Also because everyone will

Ethical egoism is the normative theory that the promotion of one's own good is in accordance with morality. In the strong version, it is held that it is always moral to promote one's own good, and it is never moral not to promote it. In the weak version, it is said that although it is always moral to promote one's own good, it is not necessarily never moral to not. That is, there may be conditions in which the avoidance of personal interest may be a moral action.

There is a certain innate desire to help others, just as others will feel that same fulfillment for returning that aid. At the same time, however, there is also an inherent yearning to seek out one’s own best interest. This brings about a discussion regarding the difference between psychological egoism and ethical egoism. To understand the similarities and differences, one must first understand the two concepts including their natures, as well as their doctrines of motivation.

Since its initial launch in 1994, Amazon.com has now become the biggest e-commerce store in the world. Despite the slow start during its early years, Amazon has skyrocketed its growth around 2014 with its $90 billion revenue and 154,100 employees (“The Amazon Effect”). The increasing popularity of the company is backed up by its convenience and cheap factors that are present in e-commerce stores especially Amazon. The rapid and sudden grow of Amazon pushes the company to expand its factories and internal system. Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon, has been known for his powerful and authoritarian style of leadership. However, as of now, Amazon has raised several controversies regarding its actions from tax avoidances, predatory pricing, and the mistreatment of workers. These controversies grabbed a lot of attention especially for tech enthusiasts and engineers. Even though these controversies are generally labeled as misconducts and bad practices, it turns out these practices are not necessarily unethical when seen from the three ethical perspectives: Kantian theory, Utilitarianism, and Ethical Egoism perspective. These three common perspectives in the study of ethics can be used to evaluate the ethicality of the internal practices and effects of Amazon.

John’s behavior in this situation would be considered moral in the ethical egoism form of consequentialist approach, the behavior is promoting his self-interest (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). The ethical egoism approach focuses on one’s self serving interest with no regard for others interests or feelings except for instances when helping others serves a purpose of furthering one’s own desires. In this situation, John’s actions would be considered immoral if he were concerned for Jane’s interests over his own. In the contractualism form of consequentialist approach, John’s actions would not be moral, as his behavior would be violating a social contract with society (Williams & Arrigo, 2012).

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.

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.

Ethics of Emergencies “The Ethics of Emergencies” explains Ayn Rand’s radical and unique view of altruism. She believes that there are 4 consequences of altruism, all of which are negative. These, simply put, are lack of self-esteem, lack of respect for others, a pessimistic view of life, and an indifference to ethics. She says that altruism hinders acts of true benevolence, and instead people act out of an obligation to others that has been internalized over time. Rand then argues that one should only volunteer to help strangers in emergency situations, and even then, only when the risk to one’s own life is less than the risk to the stranger’s. Rand advocates action in such emergencies because of the high value of human life. But Rand

The Consequentialist theory of Ethical Egoism sets out to prove that the morally right action is one that aims to maximise one’s own self-interest. The moral theory runs on the premise that the principle of self-interest accounts for all one’s moral obligations, therefore one ought to act in their own self-interest. This essay will provide three arguments for Ethical Egoism, and argue that they do not succeed in proving Ethical Egoism is sufficiently coherent and consistent when applied as a moral theory everyone should follow in the real world.

Asceticism. Asceticism is a practice of severe self-discipline in order to obtain spiritual and religious goals (Brown, Garrels, & Reimer 2011, p. 380). It would be wrong according to this theory to seek anything worldly if it does not serve the purpose to enlighten oneself or help one spiritually to achieve their religious aspirations. This can be seen very negatively to those who lack self-control even though they might not practice gluttony when seeking interest that provide pleasure to them. This view of ethics does understand a certain part of the Scripture but it is directed toward the few who can handle this responsibility. The Christian perspective makes very clear that some have the ability to sustain from all things and commit themselves

“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.

I find this topic for a journal really interesting because I feel as if the whole idea of helping people without doing harm is the entire focus of this class. We discussed this point in Robert Lupton’s Toxic Charity and we are talking about it now in Tori Hogan’s Beyond Good Intentions. This idea of helping without doing harm interesting because most people probably feel like they are helping others when in reality they may be causing more harm than good. In my opinion, it is possible to help without doing harm, however, there is a fine line between help and harm that can sometimes be difficult to see.

The theory of Utilitarianism states that actions should be judged as right or wrong depending on whether they cause more happiness or unhappiness. It weighs the rightness and wrongness of an action based on consequences of that action.