In the study of ethics, egoism is highly relevant since people are often faced with moral choices that require them to prioritize either their own needs or someone else’s. Most ethical theories do not consider the interests of the moral agent when offering frameworks for ethical decision-making. Instead, people are encouraged to select the options that benefit others or accord with ethical values and duties. Taking this argument into account, it can be claimed that ethical egoism compensates for the gaps in other ethical theories by allowing individuals to act in their own best interests. The present paper will discuss this argument to evaluate whether or not it is true.
First, it is essential to distinguish between psychological and ethical egoism because these are often confused. Psychological egoism refers to the view that humans always behave in their best interest and have no choice to do otherwise (Pojman & Fieser, 2011). Thus, even when people do good deeds, they do so based on the perceived benefits that they would obtain from others. For example, religious people may seem selfless if they adhere to the tenets of their religion; however, based on psychological egoism, they only do so to escape punishment or earn their happiness. Ethical egoism might stem from psychological egoism, but rather than arguing that people have no other choice than to be selfish, this theory posits that humans should act in their best interest (Pojman & Fieser, 2011). In this way, performing actions that are rewarding in one way or another is a moral imperative rather than a psychological rule.
Some people might argue that ethical egoism is merely a construct developed to allow people to follow their desires instead of pursuing the greater good. Nevertheless, scholars described the benefits of ethical egoism for society, drawing from economics, biology, and even virtue theories (Pojman & Fieser, 2011). One of the critical arguments, besides the psychological explanation of egoism, is that focusing solely on others’ needs or one’s duties is self-destructive. Altruism, although often proclaimed as imperative to social good, diminishes the value of an individual’s life in favor of society (Pojman & Fieser, 2011). If all people will act in others’ interests and forget about their own lives, society might cease to exist. For instance, many famous artists, musicians, and business persons defied the wishes of others while pursuing their dreams. Had they put other people’s needs before their own, society and the economy would not benefit from their work. This side of the problem is often ignored by ethical theories that promote altruism as a moral imperative.
Another vital issue to consider while examining the contribution of ethical egoism is the people’s capacity to understand others’ real needs. Although this is rarely discussed in ethical literature, people are often incorrect about what others need. Hence, by prioritizing other people’s interests or their duties, one risks leaving at least two people unhappy. Ethical egoism fulfills this deficiency, too, because it encourages people to act by their wishes and interests.
On the whole, ethical egoism is a crucial theory that contributes to scholarly thought on morality and offers an alternative framework for ethical decision-making. Although some people might argue that it justifies immoral behaviors, in reality, ethical egoism addresses the deficiencies of other ethical theories. For instance, it contributes to society indirectly by balancing individuals’ interests with those of the community while also preventing destructive selflessness. Therefore, the claim considered in the paper appears to be correct, and ethical egoism is a valid framework for moral action.
Reference
Pojman, L. P., & Fieser, J. (2011). Ethics: Discovering right and wrong (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.