Ethics: Fourth Study Guide: Ethical Egoism

"Ethical Egoism" Lewis Vaughn. (pp 92-101)

Read every word. Do not skim.
Look for ideas that are new and different from what you are used to.
If there's more than one way to interpret something, pick the most intelligent interpretation.
If you have trouble with a paragraph, read it sentence by sentence, word by word.
Put everything into your own words.
Write down questions and comments as they occur to you while you're reading.

Before you start, I'd like you to be aware of the Aristotlean principle of endoxical constraint. "Endoxa" is an ancient Greek word for the commonly accepted use-meanings of words. It refers to what words are commonly used to mean is the writer's own society. Aristotle held that if a writer significsanly changed the meaning of a common word, that writer would have violated the endoxical constraint, and would thereby be talking rubbish. For instance, if someone were to write as if the word "free" meant "random" instead of it's normal meaning of "unconstrained," that writer would have violated the endoxical constraint and gone out into la-la land. Understanding this, it is important to note that we have to stick very closely to the core meaning of "egoism." Ethical egoism implies we should condemn altruists as bad people, while actually being an egoist implies I should encourage them, so they help me more.

Questions for page 92

What is meant by a "consequentialist" moral theory? (Hint: Look at the key words on page 89, and maybe skim pages 81-82)
What is the "attractive core" of consequentialism?
According to ethical egoism, what is the morally right action?
On the one hand, how do we tend to view flagrantly self-interested actions?
What kind of people do we frown upon?
What do we sometimes want to do?
What does ethical egoism say is our moral duty?
Does ethical egoism say we have any other moral duties?
What does it say we should always put first?
According to ethical egoism, exactly when should we advance the interests of others?
(By ethical egoism, should we help poor people when there's ABSOLUTELY nothing in it for us?)
(By ethical egoism, should we save a drowning person when there's ABSOLUTELY nothing in it for us?)
According to Vaughn, is absolute self-interest neccessarily selfishness?

As a point of terminology, in philosophy, the term "egoist" is used to denote a person who absolutely always acts in their own absolute best interest, no matter what, while the term "ethical egoist" is a person who believes that morality requires everyone to be egoists. Vaughn writes as if "ethical egoist" means the same thing as "egoist," but it doesn't. I'd also like to mention that there is also "predominanat" egoism, in which a person looks out for himself almost all the time. The important difference is that, from the point of view of ethical egoism, the predominant egoist is a morally bad person because the predominant egoist will sometimes make a small sacrifice of his own interests to help another person, which ethical egoism says we should never do. So the thing to remember is that ethical egoism doesn't say you should usually serve your own best interest but sometimes sacrifice your interests to help another person even when it does you absolutely no good to help that person. It says you should always serve your own absolute best interest, no matter what the cost to others. And one more thing. To make things even more confusing, people sometimes refer to "ethical egoism" just as "egoism," and trust the reader to figure out that they're talking about the doctrine rather than just the practice of always looking out for oneself no matter what. I will try not to do this, but keep an eye out for it anyway.

Questions for page 93

What are selfish acts?
What are self-interested acts?
(Are all selfish acts neccessarily self-interested?)
(Can you give an example of a selfish act that isn't self-interested?)
(Are all self-interested acts neccessarily selfish?)
(Can you give an example of a self-interested act that isn't selfish?)
Does Vaughn think we can equate egoism with selfishness?
(Does Vaughn give an argument to prove that ethical egoism doesn't entail absolute selfishness for everyone?)
(Does Vaughn give any reason to think that ethical egoism never requires one to be selfish?)
(Does ethical egoism say we can never be selfish?)
(Can you think of a scenario where ethical egoism would tell us not to be selfish when the selfish act is in our best self interest?)
Can we assume egoism is synonymous with self-indulgence?
Can we assume egoism is synonymous with recklessness?
Does an egoist necessarily do whatever they desire to do?
Does an egoist necessarily do whatever gives them the most immediate pleasure?
What does the egoist do?
What do egoists have to consider?
What do egoists have to take into account?
At least most of the time, what are egoists probably better off doing?
(Does ethical egoism imply that we should do these things absolutely all the time? Why or why not?)
What is the definition of "act-egoism?"
What is the definition of "rule-egoism?"
(Are these the only two possibilities for kinds of egoism?)
Does the ethical egoist have only one way to define "self-interest?"
What is the "hedonist" definition of self-interest?
Was Epicurus tallking about immediate or long-term pleasure?
Contrary to legend, what did Epicurus think?
What did Epicurus think about drunkenness and gluttony?
(What is your personal idea of the overall most pleasant life?)
What is "self-actualization?"
(What do you think ethical egoism would say to do if it turned out that you found maximized self-actualization very unpleasant absolutely all the time?)
What is "security and material success?"
(What do you think ethical egoism would say to do if it turned out that you found maximized security and material success very unpleasant absolutely all the time?)
What is "satisfaction of desires?"
How does egoism say we should resolve conflicts between desites?
(What do you think ethical egoism would say to do if it turned out that maximally satisfying your deepest desires still left you pretty unhappy?)
What is "acquisition of power?"
(What do you think ethical egoism would say to do if it turned out that you found maximized power-acquisition very unpleasant absolutely all the time?)
(If you feel like it, find out who Damocles was, what he did, and why he has a sword named after him.)
What is "experience of happiness?"
(Would it make sense to you if I said that a maximally happy life was different from a maximally pleasant life? If so, how would that work?)
(Would a life in which you always sought happiness be different from one in which you always sought your deepest and longest term pleasures? If so, how so?)
(Suppose that all the different "self-interests" described above gave rise to very different lives for you, which of those lives would you pick?)
How do most people react to ethical egoism?
Without sneering, can you define the "noble virtue of altruism?"
(Define a "partial" altruist as someone who helps others at cost to himself some of the time, a "bounded" altruist as someone who helps others as long as it doesn't hurt him very much, and an "occasional" altruist as someone who helps people once in a while. Does altruism require us to sacrifice all of our self-interest? Is it impossible for us to be partial, bounded, or occasional altruists?)
(Is partial altruism incompatible with predominant egoism?)
(Is bounded altruism incompatible with predominant egoism?)
(Is occasional altruism incompatible with predominant egoism?)
(Define "predominant" altruism as sacrificing a considerable amount of self-interest to help others. Does predominant altruism rule out a life of deep pleasures?)
(Does predominant altruism rule out happiness?)
(Compare the bounded and predominant altruists you know to the pure egoists you know. In your opinion, who is happier?)

There is also the idea of "bounded" egoism. Bounded egoism is the combination of egoism with some other, non-egoistic moral considerations, such as fairness or compassion. A bounded egoist will seek his own self interest up just so long as doing so does no significant harm to others, or lets other come to significant harm. A bounded egoist will seek wealth and power, but will not cheat even if he can clearly get away withy it, and will make small efforts for charity when he knows those small efforts will have a big effect. Again, ethical egoist implies that a bounded egoist is a morally bad person because he sometimes sacrifices his own best interest to help others. (The bastard!)

Actually, it is also worth noting that actually being an egoist may be incompatible with being an ethical egoist. A genuine egoist will surely want other people to be altruists so he can cleverly take advantage of them. If I tell you to be an absolute egoist, which is what ethical egoism does, I am telling you to never sacrifice any of your own interests to help me, which is surely not in my best interest.

Questions for page 94

What are people sometimes supposed to feel about self-centeredness?
What does Vaughn want you to consider?
In a capitalist system, what is self-interest supposed to do?
According to Vaughn, what do economists argue about this?
(Considering the large numbers of homeless people, does everyone share in this in this prosperity?)
(Do all economists call for naked unregulated capitalism, or do some call for laws and regulations?)
Put Rosa's trilemma into your own words.
(Is self-actualization really a form of egoism?)
What are people sometimes supposed to feel about self-centeredness?
What does Vaughn want you to consider?
In a capitalist system, what is self-interest supposed to do?
According to Vaughn, what do economists argue about this?
(Considering the large numbers of homeless people, does everyone share in this in this prosperity?)
(Do all economists call for naked unregulated capitalism, or do some call for laws and regulations?)
Put Rosa's trilemma into your own words.
(Under what conditions is self-actualization a form of egoism?)
(Under what conditions is becoming the top executive a form of egoistic self-actualization?)
(Under what conditions is loyalty a form of egoistic self-actualization?)
(Under what conditions is honesty a form of egoistic self-actualization?)
(In your personal opinion, is genuine honesty really compatible with absolute egoism?)
(In your opinion, is the word "egoism" being used correctly when it is tied to loyalty and honor?)

Questions for page 95

What is likely to happen to Rosa if she takes option one?
What happens if she takes option two?
(What parts of these consequences have to do with self-interest, and which have to do with non-egoistic morality?)
(Is option two really compatible with the value of loyalty, given that Victor is a colleague?)
(What would you do if you were management and Rosa took option two with you? Would you want to promote her?)
What happens if she takes option three?
(Is option three really compatible with the value of honesty?)
How does Vaughn analyze Rosa's options? How does he think she should decide?
(If Rosa is willing to do something dishonest when it suits her own self-interest, does she really have the virtue of honesty?)
(If Rosa only burns her copy because it's the safest option for her, what does that say about the kind of person she is?
(If Rosa is the kind of person who would screw over a colleague, would you want to work with her?)
(Suppose Rosa is just an egoist in the regular sense of the word, with no concern for loyalty or honesty, what would she do?)
(If Rosa knew that the leak could never be traced back to her, what does egoism say she should do?)
(If Rosa could untraceably nobble Victor, but it would completely ruin his life, what does egoism say she should do?)
(Does it seem to you that Vaughn is bending over backwards to make ethical egoism seem like it's not completely horrible?)

Questions for page 96

How might a rule-egoist analyze Rosa's situation?
(Does rule-egoism really stand up to analysis?)
(What if an act-egoist had a policy of following self-serving rules except when breaking them gves a clear advantages?)
What question does Vaughn ask about ethical egoism?
Explain the definition of "psychological egoism."
(You should know that psychological egoism is not a scientific theory. It's just a faith-based, false belief.)
How does psychological egoism explain human action?
(What definition of "self-interest" is assumed by psychological egoism?)
(Is welfare the same thing as self-actualization or happiness?")
(Would psychological egoism make sense if it's definition of "self-interest" was "whatever the actor cares about?")
According to psychological egoism, what are we born to do?
What does the ethical egoist think about actions we cannot possibly do?
What does Vaughn think is just an obvious fact about morality?
What argument for ethical egoism does Vaughn give here?
(Does this argument start with anything like a reason to think that psychological egoism is true?)
In this argument, what is supposedly implied by the supposed fact that we can only act out of self interest?
(Does the fact that we can't stop hurricanes mean we're morally obligated to stand by and let them ravage cities?)
(Does the fact that we can't stop hurricanes mean we wouldn't be obligated to stop them is we could?)
In this argument, what is are the only things we're morally obligated to do?
(How is being the only thing we can do supposed to make an action the thing we're morally obligated to do?)
(Do you think the ethical egoist might be confused about the meaning of the term moral obligation?)
What is the formal statement of this argument for ethical egoism?
(Does Vaughn give any kind of a reason to think that that second premise is true?)

As a rule of logic, an argument has to have proven premises in order to be a good argument. If an argument has a premise that is assumed rather that proved, that argument is a bad argument.

Psychological egoism (the theory that everyone is selfish) should be contrasted with psychological eudaimonism (the idea that everyone wants to be happy) and psychological desireism (the theory that everyone is motivated by whatever they want to do at the time.)

Questions for page 97

What does Vaughn think this argument would prove if psychological egoism was true?
What is the first line of "reasoning" supporting psychological egoism?
(Does experience really show that all actions are motivated by self interest?)
What is the first reason this "argument" is far from conclusive?
What is the second reason this "argument" is far from conclusive?
What is the slightly different vein in which some advocates of psychological egoism argue?
According to psychological egoists, why would someone save a child from a burning building?
(If it's so satisfying, why doesn't everyone do it?)
(Is "satisfaction from doing what I thought I should do" the same as "welfare?")
What is the conceptual confusion involved in this argument?
Why does this argument say we perform selfless acts?
What is not shown by the idea that we achieve satisfaction in performing selfless acts?
What is the much more plausible account?
(Does the rescuer think "oh hey, a chance to get some satisfaction" or "oh crap, that kids gonna die if I don't help?)

Questions for page 98

Under what circumstances would a rescuer feel satisfaction?
(Could you ever derive satisfaction from doing something you actually did not desire to do?)
What is the moral of the story?
Why does this fit well withour experience?
When we act according to a purpose, what are we focussed on?
What do we concentrate on?
What does Joel Feinberg's Jones desire?
What does Jones not desire?
Will this work for Jones? How will it work or why won't it work?
What is the irony here?
To pursue happiness, what must Jones do?
What must we conclude about psychological egoism?
How do defenders of psychological egoism continue to defend psychological egoism?
What do they say about all the actually altruistic acts people perform every day?
What do they say about the charitable donor?
(Do they prove it's his motive, or do they just say it's his motive?
What do they say about the red cross volunteer?
(Do they prove it's his motive, or do they just say it's his motive?
Why do critics think this way of defending psychological egoism is a mistake?
What effect does it have on the theory?

Questions for page 99

Why is it a problem for a theory if anything we say could be consistent with the theory?
(Scientific theories allow us to make predictions. What predictions could psychological egoism make?)
(Why is psychological egoism uninformative?)
Why does the criterion of adequacy come in here?
What charge have some critics brought against ethical egoism?
Is ethical egoism consistent with our considered moral judgements? Why or why not?
What does ethical egoism say a son should do if he finds himself alone with his frail and aged father?
What does ethical egoism say about the moral character of a son if he doesn't kill his frail and aged father?
How do ethical egoists defend their theory?
(Do they say their theory is right to violate our normal ideas of morality?)
(Do they say their theory doesn't imply what it seems to imply?)
(If the murder really was undetectable, how would it encourage other people to do the same to him?)
(Does ethical egoism really imply that we should not murder when it is absolutely safe for us to do so?)
What is wrong with the ethical egoist's reply to this objection?

Questions for page 100

What is sometimes required by consistently looking out for one's own welfare?
What should an egoist encourage everyone else to do?
What aspect of morality is so fundamental that it seems to be a basic fact of morality?
What are we supposed to take into account?
What must we give to all persons?
What is presumed about each person?
What do we call people who treat equals unequally?
What is probably the most serious charge against ethical egoism?
(Does ethical egoism require us to screw over any particular gender, race or orientation any more than any other?)
(Is egoism really arbitrary or discriminatory?)
(Does this criticism also apply to predominant egoism? Why or or why not?)
(When you care for yourself or for your family, are you guilty of discrimination?)

Final Question

Did you answer all the regular, black font, questions into your own words?
If you didn't, go back and do that.

If any of the purple "thinky" questions intrigue you, or you have any questions of your own, please go to the FB group and post your favorite questions for general discussion.

This Site is Proudly Hosted By: