Ethical egoism is a normative theory that states an individual 's actions should be accomplished from the perspective to maximize one’s self-interest. Ethical egoism requires that people give themselves special treatment and that they have a task to fill their self-interest. Ethical egoism says that a person should only act when the action benefits themself, and they should, therefore, avoid actions when the act they are trying to fulfill provides no benefits for the individual. When an action that one performs is wrong it seems the opposite of the action performed would seem to be correct. If helping a person would prevent your own self-interest, this would seem to make it morally permissible for a person to perform harm to others in situations where their self-interest would benefit from the action.
However, the good will may depend on outside factors to bring about good in a person. Thus, I argue if Kant’s theory were true, it would be very difficult to be a good person as utilitarianism do not allow for acts that go beyond duty. Kant’s argument suggests that good will is the only thing good without qualification. First, Kant begins to distinguish between things that are good without qualification and things that are good only under certain qualified conditions. For example, gifts of nature such as understanding, wit, and judgement, or gifts of fortune such as power, riches,
Mill presents an argument for the value of utilitarianism as a moral theory. He suggests that happiness should be the criterion of morality. The morality of an action should be judged based on the consequences produced because if the action is morally right, it produces the most good for everyone involved. Mills also follows on and suggests that happiness is the sole desire of human life. We thrive to achieve the utmost desire and happiness while avoiding actions that result in pain and sadness.
What Eisenberg and Mussen stated is that prosocial behaviour is done more due to the consequences of the action rather than what drives us to do it. Prosocial is basically doing good to someone or for the society, in which when doing good to society, it helps
Altruism theory can basically be defined as an act that an individual performs, in order to benefit someone else. Altruism can also be known as Ethical Altruism. Furthermore, this specific theory speaks about the good deeds that an individual would undertake to help and benefit someone else, even if it requires the sacrifice of self-interest. The action that the individual would tackle would consider being morally right if the result would benefit the recipient than the person actually conducting the action (Mastin, 2008) . Majority of the time these actions that are performed by individuals are not only about doing good for other personnel but also to protect these persons them from being harm or getting injured in a certain situation
To be an egoist is to put your own interests ahead of those of others. Gekko conjures the image of an egoist who is ruthless, unprincipled and inconsiderate. Some moral philosophers are praising virtues of egoism. Egoism could firstly be seen as a psychological fact and secondly an ethical ideal. Some may claim that egoism is a psychological fact and that deep down we are just selfish beings who acts to maximise our own interests.
Some objections to normative Hedonism a. On the hedonist account the only intrinsic thing of worth is pleasure and pain. All else, friendships, character, achievements, virtues are of instrumental value-they are a means to an end, either to increasing the pleasure they cause or diminishing the pain. The oponents of hedonism say that there are things beside pleasure which contribute to well being. Values such as love, friendship, generosity, virtue, achievement are taken by non hedonists to have value of their own, they are in themselves valuable.
Utilitarianism is the theory that the moral worth of an action is only determined by its contribution to maximizing happiness or pleasure among all people. According to Bernard Williams, Utilitarianism threatens to alienate us from crucial aspects of our moral selves. He believes that our moral feelings, actions, and most importantly, our most fundamental 'group projects ' and commitments may be alienated while partaking in utilitarian principles due to its disregard to our feelings, in the case that they do not benefit the majority. Williams argues this by introducing the scenarios of George and Jim and guessing how a utilitarian would respond to such scenarios. Through the use of these examples and hypothesising, Williams concluded that
According to Hobbes, in order to escape the intolerable state of nature and to gain mutual benefit, selfish rational people would choose to cooperate with each other, also proven by the Prisoner’s Dilemma (Rachels, 2011, pp. 87-88). This requires people to make a social agreement, or contract on the rules of cooperation. These enforceable rules of social cooperation that selfish, rational people would agree upon on the condition that it creates benefit and
This applies the sense of wisdom because the individual knows that not following a social ritual would invoke a moral consequence: shame. Once an individual feels a sense of shame, their soul is not in harmony. Thus, they would not be living a good life at that moment. Another point Mencius would make is a social ritual is not merely created because it is the right thing to do. Rather, the reason behind why a social ritual was created makes it right.