Discussion Question 1: Ethical egoism...

    This week we will be discussing ethical egoism in our section. As part of your participation grade, please write a brief, maybe 150 words, response doing one of the following: 1) either arguing in favor or against of ethical egoism (remember, we want an argument, not just assertions) or 2) a civil response or extension of someone's else's argument.

This is due by Friday at 11 am.

Comments

[Ron]

Ethical egoism is the idea that people should behave and act out of their own self-interest, without regard for the well-being others. While this may be a controversial idea, it does not mean that the ethical egoist would intentionally harm others without a valid reason. Oftentimes, when acting out of selfish reasons, the ethical egoist would actually be doing a service to those around him or her. Perhaps the best example is seen in the workings of the free market as argued by Adam Smith. With human greed as the primary motivator for peoples’ actions, prices in the economy will eventually reach an equilibrium and an efficient market results. In this example, not only do selfish actions not harm others, but it also results in a better society for everybody. It can be seen through this that ethical egoism works.

[Eric]

As I understand it, ethical egoism means that we all do what is best for ourselves. While this seems perfectly alright as far as the individual is concerned, it can cause harm to those around us. When attempting to achieve what is best for ourselves, we give in to desires which may not be best for the society as a whole. Not everyone's desires can be considered morally good. Some individual's desires may cause harm to others. As far as I am concerned this is the biggest problem with ethical egoism. Say that one guy/girl really likes this other guy/girl. If he acts what is best for himself then he goes after this girl, regardless of what's best for the girl/guys in the long run. This could lead to a short-term relationship when the other guy/girl had a better situation going with the other individual. Then what seems best in the short-term ends up in disaster. Both the guy/girl and their partner could end up in some short-term crappy situation. In this example the person acting in what's best for themselves actually ended up in failure for all those involved. In the long-term aspect, I consider ethical egoism as a characteristic that turns into disaster not only for the individual, but for all those involved.

[Gina]

Ethical egoism is doing what best benefits yourself and not looking out for the interests of others. Although it would be believed that being selfish benefits you more, this is not actually always the case. Suppose you cut everyone in line at the movies for the benefit that you can get to the movie on time, well it might not actually benefit you in the end because others might think you suck. It's definitely not in my self interest for others to hate me. Ethical egoism often only works in the materialistic way like in my example, I'll get into the movie faster, but everyone around me now doesn't like me, and may talk badly of me. And that sucks for me, which defeats the fact that ethical egoism is doing what is best for you.

[Dallas Aramburu]

Ethical egoism clearly states that it is in the individual’s best interest to act only out of selfishness and to seek what is best for oneself. Arguably, this doctrine refutes what is basically taught to and lived by many human beings since birth: treat others as you would want to be treated. By accepting ethical egoism, most people contradict everything they have ever known. If one only sought his/her self-interests, then ultimately others would be hurt in the process. Everyone cannot be treated equally and with their best interests in mind simultaneously; someone has to give somewhere along the line. For example, suppose two colleagues are competing for the same promotion; only one of them will ultimately get the new job. In their own self-interest, each colleague bad mouths the other around the office in an attempt to gain more credibility. In the end one individual will win by acting in his own self-interest, but at the cost of compromising the morals that have been taught to him since birth. Thus, ethical egoism only results in more hostility in an already unfriendly world.

[Mary Schaubert]

Ethical egoism is an idea that is too extreme to make much sense. Human beings are interdependant upon one another. We are extremely social, and our economic system is completely intertwined. For one man to do well, others must contribute to supporting his cause. After all, Bill Gates wouldn't have any of what he has if no one had enough money to own a computer. We all need help at some time or another. It is difficult for any one person to be completely self-sufficient. Not everyone is capable of looking after themselves. Those are the people that would be most devastated by an ethically egoistic society. Everyone should promote the good of the people if they want to promote good for themselves. Everyone should also keep a balance between helping others and themselves. For example, if a man who is an excellent swimmer sees a child drowning in a 3 foot pool, it is entirely logical that he jump in and save the child. However, if that same man could not swim at all, then it would be illogical for him to attempt a rescue. Our own lives should be valued and protected, but so should the lives of others.

[Colleen]

Ethical egoism is the belief that one should do what is in the best interest of oneself. It also is the promotion of one’s good directly related to morality. However, what is in one’s best interest might not be in the best of interests to those around them. At the same time, what is in the best interest of one may not be considered the most moral thing to do. It is almost as if ethical egoists could pursue self interest at the cost of others. Most have been brought up based on the fact that everyone should be treated equally and with respect. By pursuing ethical egoism, the standards on which we have been brought up to follow will have all been wasted. The main criticism of ethical egoism is that it is based on selfishness. For example, a small group is working together on a speech and is given certain materials to base their speech off of. One person, and ethical egoist, decides it is in his or her best interest to take all of the materials for themselves, leaving the rest of the group with nothing to base research off of. Their speech is a wreck because only one person had valuable research. So not only did the rest of the group suffer, the ethical egoist suffered from the group grade as well. This demonstrates how ethical egoism, while it supposedly is in one’s best interest, can not only harm the interests of others but harm the ethical egoist themselves.

[Stacie]

There is no practical way that ethical egoism could lead to a well-functioning society. A society is formed by people bonding to together to do what is best for society, which is also what is best for the individuals. If people were to spend all their time and energy just trying to survive, their life would be miserable, stressful, and unfulfilling. If people were to work together, they could produce things more efficiently and have time for unnecessary but enjoyable things. People could put the energy that they used to expend protecting themselves from people that were only doing what was best for them to spend on other things, and accomplishing more than is just necessary for mere survival. A society that does not follow ethical egoism could work for the best of all, if everyone agrees to do what is in their best interest only when it does not harm others. Ethical egoism is not in the best interest of anyone because it only produces a short, miserable, brutish life.

[Paul Biasco]

Ethical egoism, being the pursuit of anything that is beneficial to oneself, in my opinion is wrong. If everyone is attempting to do whatever is beneficial to them then nothing benefical will come out of it. Everyone will be taking advantage of everyone else and there would be chaos. I agree with Socrates' point in an earlier reading about the soul. Not neccesarily in the same terms he put it, but I don't think you can be in harmony with yourself if you allow your "appetite" to take control of your life. I liked the article argueing against egoism we talked about today (Thursday). It doesn't make sense for something I want to do to be right and for the same action if someone else does is wrong in my mind. I am not the only concious being. I think harming another for your own benefit will actualy harm yourself. It will always be in the back of your mind. In conclusion, I think ethical egoism is the wrong way to go, and can only do more harm than good.

[Bill Storms]

After reading the critiques of ethical egoism by some of my peers I am afraid that we may be leveling pointless charges against egoism. Several comments have now been made about egoism undermining our raising. While this is likely true, it doesn’t matter to the Egoist, and likely doesn’t matter to anyone in this class. In fact, rebelling against a flawed up bring is commonly viewed as our duty. If Dad is a racist and Mom tells you the Holocaust never happened most would say that you have to overcome your up bring, and that it was a waste from the start. Perhaps it was in our parent’s best interest to raise us as meek, conforming altruists. None of us will ever get in the way of their aspirations.

[Amy Neuberger]

To me, ethical egoism makes life seem like one big rat race in which everyone is just competing with each other to get the best and achieve their self-interests. In other words, people sound pretty selfish. In the words of Lily Tomlin, "The trouble with the rat race is that even if you win, you're still a rat." Therefore, even if we are constantly acting out of self-interest, how is this bettering ourselves? By only caring about ourselves, in no way do we become a better person or serve any humanitarian cause. Besides not serving a humanitarian cause, ethical egoism barely serves pragmatic causes either; in ethical egoism, one is always looking to benefit himself, and although it may succeed at pragmatism, ethical egoists usually do not attempt to benefit others and themselves. Only occasionally can an ethical egoist benefit another while benefiting himself; benefiting the other was not an intention. Since an ethical egoist only acts to benefit himself, it basically gives the society in which it is present an "every man for himself" theme or “rat race”, often seen in the workplace, stock exchange, etc. This has become the American society's norm.

[Brian Joiner]

Ethical egoism to me is wrong in many different aspects. I am a strong believer that just acting out of your own self interests, without regard for the interests of others is wrong. If everyone acts out of their own self interests there would be a lot of problems in the world; for one nothing would get accomplished. Chaos would occur because everyone would be trying to get what they wanted which would essentially lead to confusion and anarchy. One of the main criticisms to ethical egoism would be the fact that it has a basis of selfishness. People could just go around taking things that aren’t theirs just because they want it. From the egoists point of view if someone had something that I really wanted and it was in my interest to take it then I could. This disregard for others property would eventually lead to a selfish non-lasting society. To sum it up, our society works the way it does because we all understand that we have our own interests, but we also understand that we cannot act based solely on them.

[Tom Carberry]

The theory of ethical egoism states that human actions should be guided by strictly by the potential for personal gain. A person should not act kind or mean unless that action will contribute to their personal well being. People do not need to feel obligated to be caring towards others. However, in most instances, acting kindly towards others will result in a better personal outcome than acting cruel. On the other hand, for those few instances where acting “immoral” will result in personal gain, one should act immoral. People should try to act moral because having a reputation as a moral person typically leads to happiness. On the other hand, acting immoral without getting caught is perfectly acceptable according to egoism. Though, typically there are few foolproof immoral acts. Usually, the immoral act puts one’s happiness in jeopardy. Ethical egoism is overall a valid theory. Most acts of kindness are derived from the thought that the act will lead to personal gain for the person performing the kind deed.

[Nora Bryar]

I think that ethical egoism is not the way to go about getting things that you want. Simply stated, ethical egoism is acting out to benefit yourself and it doesn't matter if people are harmed along the way. I agree with some of my peers when they say that ethical egoism could not work out in a functional society. Too many problems would be caused as a result of people trying to benefit themselves. For instance, say that a man who has recently lost his job decides to become a con-man to serve his best-interest. He will obtain money by extorting other people. While this works out great for the Egoist, who is raking in the cash, many people and their families will have lost their savings and will become poor as a result of this selfish man's con. Therefore, I don't think ethical egoism is right.

[Katie]

So far, in all of these comments, no one has tried to support ethical egoism. I won't say that I agree with it, only that I do believe that it is an acceptable belief. Just because people won't like you is of no concern to some, and all the concern of others. If a person was an ethical egoist, acting only in self-interest, who's to say they wouldn't want to be kind to others? Perhaps that fulfils their self-interest--if their self-interest was to be liked by others. And I think that people who embrace this kind of thinking (EE) probably don't care about others, either having to do with their reputation or the common good. They get what they want, so why care about things they don't want? Think of a spoiled little kid. That's precisely how these people would act, in my opinion. Now this kid may harm others, but in the long run, as long as they get what they want, they're happy.

This may be a bit off topic, but do what do you think? Are these moral philosophies learned, for example from your family, or is a person already predisposed to being a certain way, such as always acting on self-interest (EE), and needs to be taught another philosophy?

[Yuzhe Li]

I think ethical egoism is a crazy idea, if everyone in the society are act behave of their own self-interest, then the communities will become total out of control. There will be nothing produce in the society, because we all are so busy try to secure our properties. Also, we don't see a point of producing, because we could take whatever we want, eventhough that's not belong to us. The out come of that will do more harm to us than good. For example, when we working in a group project. Every member of the group should do something, but everyone not interest in working on the project and the project never got done before the due date. The result is that everyone of the member will have a failing grade for the project.

[Orlando Chavez]

I first agreed with ethical egoism. I felt that in the end everything we do is in our own self interest or so we think. For example donating to charity may seem like it won't benfit us at all. Yet we may feel like we did something good if we donated to charity and we'll fell good about our selves. In the same way if we do something bad like stealing it may benfit us in a material way yet it won't we may have a guilty consicence. In a way I agree with Socrates. Yet know that I thnk about it if I agree with Socrates I am still agreeing with ethical egoism. So as my final stance I am in favor of ethical egoism. We just all have diffrent things in our personal intrest.

[Deborah]

Well I disagree with ethical egoism. I support what Amy said (earlier entry) about how people are really selfish when acting in their own self-interest for personal gain. Even though we could be benefiting others and not harming them, we are still having the intention of acting upon our own desires. Again, this is purely selfish. I also liked Brian’s example of how this would ultimately lead to confusion and anarchy in becoming a selfish non-lasting community. Who would want to live in a society like that? If we give everyone in this world what they wanted, many people will truly benefit but also in the same time others will be harmed. In other words, I can think that I’m doing something right while for the same action someone will think its wrong. This goes along with the same idea that Paul’s talking about in the earlier entry. Nothing beneficial will come out of acting in your best self-interest. I really believe that there are more disadvantages with ethical egoism.

[Victoria Coats]

Personally, I feel that the emotional punishments or rewards one receives as a result of his or her actions are directly linked to altruism, and not ethical egoism.

In reference to the example of donating to charity, it would be one thing if this donation would tangibly benefit you in some way (i.e. maybe being a cancer patient who donates money to cancer research?). However, I’m not sure I believe that the emotional reward you receive is in line with ethical egoism. Conversely, I think the psychological benefit you receive from doing a good deed is the feeling of fulfillment in your moral obligation of putting others above yourself.

Next, I disagree with the argument that a guilty conscience works against your best interest; in fact, I would argue that a guilty conscience would violate ethical egoism, as I would assume that ethical egoists would believe that you should feel no guilt for acting in a way that would most directly benefit you.

[Tom Miebach]

I would like to address the first comment which links ethical egoism with the free market teachings of Adam Smith. While it is true that ethical egoism nicely complements capitalism due to its emphasis on selfishness as the prime motivator for human behavior, I would like to challenge whether or not this results in a better society for all. For instance, those living in poverty who lack the means to elevate their standard of living due to structural unemployment hardly view this system of greed to be beneficial to them, in fact it is in their self-interest to reform or overthrow the system. I believe that ethical egoism is fairly prevalent in our culture as a way to justify our values of wealth and material consumption. However, I doubt that sweat-shop workers and third-world laborers, those who slave so that we may enjoy our prosperity, share our enthusiasm for a system based on individual greed. On the other hand, if each person had equal access to success ethical egoism may be tenable, yet this is clearly not the case in the free market. Therefore, just as capitalism fails to allow a decent life for the majority of this world's people, ethical egoism in practice would lead to a society marked by conflict, exploitation, and inequality as each person struggles to satisfy his greed at the expense of his neighbor.

[Jorge]

i can go either way on ethical egoism. For the most part i think it is better to act out of your own self intertest. Most of us would agree on whats acceptable and whats not. If we are negatively affected by what another person does acting out of their own self interest we dont neccessarily have to sit back and allow it. Luckily in our society i dont think a small group acting out of their own self interest would have any net affect on society as a whole since we have laws and courts that punish those who cross the line. Although i dont entirely agree with ethical egoism im not completely against it. I still treat others the way i want to be treated, however i still strongly feel my needs are more important to me than some stranger i could really care less about

[Mike McArdle]

Ethical egoism is controversial in the sense that it promotes the self-interest of a person without taking into consideration the well-being of others. I’ve read these other posts of people saying that ethical egoism benefits people in the short run while hurting them in the long run. Others have also posted that ethical egoism often only works in a materialistic way. As I read these posts, I thought of one scenario that would support ethical egoism almost definitely. I am using this example which stems from the movie Flight of the Phoenix. There are three strangers on a plane along with a pilot who is armed with a pistol. The airplane experiences technical difficulties and crashes in the desert. The pilot dies on impact but the three strangers manage to come out alive with a few bumps and bruises. The strangers manage to salvage what little supplies they can from the wreckage, most importantly water. Now there is only enough water for three people to live on for 1 more week. One stranger notices the pistol on the dead pilot, retrieves it, and puts it away in his pocket. Now for argument sake, let’s say that there is guaranteed to be a rescue plane flying over the wreckage in two weeks or less. The stranger that found the pistol kills the other two strangers so that he can live two extra days and maybe by some miracle be found and rescued. The existing stranger buries the two dead bodies, and sure enough a search and rescue plane finds him ten days later. The stranger acted out of self-interest and definitely did not take into account the well being of others. There is nothing moral about what he did, but his acts worked out for him in the long run because he got to live. Is this case an extreme one? Sure it is. But is it impossible? I can agree that ethical egoism might not be the best route to take in most situations, but in others it can look the most attractive. You’ll just have to ask yourself the simple question: what would you do if you were in that strangers shoes?

[Mike Z]

Ethical egoism simply does not make sense. A person can only serve their own self interest for so long before it becomes an issue in their life. I think that the golden rule is often overlooked in our society, but it is something that may improve our society. I tend to agree with Plato who felt that justice is doing what you say you will. Although many people disregard Jesus as a philosopher simply because he is connected to religion, he was a great philosophy. I would agree with what he says about being humble and being willing to serve others, “Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.” Now some may argue that the reason why a person would follow this is that they want to be the best in heaven, however I think that the intended motivation would be to serve their creator. If we serve our creator with all we have and humble ourselves and allow him to direct our lives we will be satisfied beyond whatever selfish motivation can bring to us.

[Alicia]

Ethical egoism, at first glance, seems like a good idea to me. You can do what you want as long as you can get away with it, and why not? It seems to me that the people who are actually true ethical egoists are the people who are in jail, or on their way. So maybe in the long run it really does not serve one's self interest. I also believe that some people just do not feel guilty about doing these things. From personal experience, I have come to realize that some people, after going through a lot (i.e. drug addiction, prison, illness due to), that they have lost almost all of their feeling. It takes a very strong person to only act for himself/herself. If you can do it and ultimately feel happy, then go for it. I think in some cases, though, you need to look out for your own self-interest. For example, getting ahead in the business world; you may know someone that can get you a job, even if their not the most morally tuned person you ask them for one anyway. There may be circumstances that you have to fire a perfectly capable employee in order for you to get ahead. What are you supposed to do? You have a choice, but looking out for your self-interest means getting the job that allots more benifits to you. All things considered, if you can get along in life as an ethical egoist while feeling good about yourself and your life, then kudos to you. Otherwise, be in the majority and have a little compassion for others.

[Cynthia Bangert]

In his critique of ethical egoism, James Rachels writes that life is pointless if you are unhappy. I agree and naturally, want to be happy. On first glance, I would say that the best way for me to be happy would be to embrace ethical egoism and to act in my own self interest all the time. Although I could be an ethical egoist and still live in a community, I would never be entirely integrated into it because I couldn’t be trusted to consistently help anyone but myself. This would quickly lead to mental and emotional isolation. Human beings were not made to be isolated. The reason why we live in communities and form relationships is because it is unnatural not to. My self interest IS other people. I suppose that it could be argued that my self interest is to live in a community, and this could be used to justify lots of actions that might not make me happy, such as cleaning my half of the room and not stealing a friend’s boyfriend. However, I believe that Human Beings are inherently interdependent and it is impossible to find happiness by only following my self interest because we cannot be completely happy without other people.

[Mark]

I believe that E.E. is a good plan. It is better to act out of a self interest for all matters. This does not mean that we need to go and find someone that we can hurt and do it out of self-interest. I believe that, for the most part, doing the right thing usually serves in our best interest. If we are nice to someone than it is more likly that they are to be nice back, especially if you are in time of need. We just need to figure out which decision has more of a potential benifit. Thats what I think we all do anyway. Otherwise there would be massive lines of people just waiting to give homeless people their lose change. Walking past them faster is more benificail to us at the time. Now thats not to say I don't give money, i do, but its because I love to hear some of the stories that these men and women have. If anyone has not met Larry yet, go do it. He is always on 5th and chalmers. I give him money in exchange for his conversation because it is more benificial to me at that time because I would rather make a hilarious story than have an uneventful walk. E.E. says I have the choice in all situations to decide what I want to do and then if I have to do it.