User:Atcovi/Ethics/Lecture2

Credits: Prof. Sean Castleberry

Egoism & Altruism
In Leviathan, we are introduced to the idea of psychological egoism. This was a theory proposed by Thomas Hobbes, a 1600s English philosopher.

Egoism

 * Egoism: A philosophical principle that puts emphasis on the self. It states that human beings only do good actions out of self-interest. A potential egoism argument made to examples throughout history of human beings selflessly saving the lives of other human beings is that they wanted to "show off" or to avoid the feeling of guilt.

Before looking further into egoism, it is imperative to understand the differences between descriptive and nominative ethical theories.

- Descriptive: Only describe what the situation is (ex, The man saved the child).

- Nominative: Describes the situation + judgement (ex, It was a good thing that the man saved the child).

Psychological Egoism

 * Thomas Hobbes
 * J. J. Rousseau

All humans naturally are looking out for themselves first before others. Without a civil society, people will always be out to get each other. In a civil society? We literally create a civil society in order to protect our desires, not for the "betterment of the world". Hobbes believes:

1) We all choose to live in society because we worry about ourselves.

2) By nature, we are self interested.

3) We would be fools if we didn't look out for ourselves (because if not, we would be taken advantage of by others)

Advantages

 * Honest approach to how humans work.
 * Appeals to cynicism.
 * Uncommon, but serves as an excuse to be selfish.

Disadvantages

 * Falsification gives room for any scientific theory to be proven wrong. In egoism, since anything action can fall back to "well, you felt a good feeling, innit?". This means that egoism isn't a commendable scientific theory.
 * Re-assess the definition of "selfishness". "Just because we get a good feeling from it, doesn't mean that we are selfish" - Mary Midgley.
 * Binary Opposites - Midgley is back at it again with another philosophical principle. Just like evil exists, good exists too. The only reason we understand one from the other is because both exist in our reality to differentiate themselves from each other. If selfishness exists, then selflessness exists as well! Although egoists do acknowledge Midgley's reasoning, they assert that doesn't mean that both principles automatically exist. For example, evil vs. goodness doesn't really mean that there is something actually known as "goodness".

Ethical Egoism
"do whatever you want to others as long as it brings about good for you"

It is a good thing to be selfish/look out for yourself. In Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead, Rand advocates for readers to look out for themselves and asserts its the right thing to do in order to prevent yourself from being taken advantage of. If you decide to take charge of your life and improve yourself, you wil improve others as they will be forced to work for themselves and not leech off of you.

Though this may be flawed in the following scenario: You steal $100 dollars from your friend. If you tell him, then you'll be regarded as untrustworthy and a thief. If you keep the $100 dollars and take yourself out to a buffet, that is better in accordance to ethical egoism as it benefits you and puts you in a higher status.

Ethical egoism does go against this notion in that it encourages you to do actions which bring about the best consequences for you. In this case, giving the $100 dollars to your friend would be the beneficial thing as it will prevent you from doing same/worse mischevious actions in the future.

Ayn Rand's Egoism

 * Rand argues against altruists in that "emergency situations" (save 1 person or save a dog from the speeding train) are not 99% of the cases in our daily lives.

The human being should be rational. Irrationality would be to sacrifice one-self (give up a higher value for a lesser one). Rationality is never giving up your higher values for a lesser values. Some may argue that we make sacrifices all the time (raise my kids rather than go to school), but Rand argues that this is a misunderstanding. You actually are not sacrificing anything as you value your kids more than you value school.

Husband/Wife/Cancer
Rand uses the "husband/wife/cancer" example. If you had the chance to save your wife or 10 other women by giving up your wealth, totalitarian altruists would argue that you must save the 10 other women as this is the more "self-less"/"good" act. Rand argues that you would selfishly save your wife as that would bring you more joy than saving 10 random women over your wife - and Rand defends this position.

Tsunami Emergency Example
In the "tsunami emergency" example, a stranger is in need of help during a tsunami. You probably should not save that person as you may die in the process, but in the case of the one who puts humanity above their own life - this is still a selfish act as you cannot live with the guilt of not saving humanity.

Altruism --> Tyranny
Altruism: Give up everything to help others. In the process, when you give yourself up - those same people will take advantage and dominate you.

Christianity
Rand believes that the principles of "loving your neighbors" would lead to altruism (and tyranny, consequently). She believes religion should be separate from government. Rand believes lazy people will take advantage of the hard-working people (welfare). Many people seek a middle ground for welfare, but even middle grounds require a lot of money. Rand would want to completely cut off welfare and allow the 'poor' folks to either suffer & die or to realize the situation and work hard.

Disadvantages

 * In Plato's Republic, Socrates argues that ethical egoism is problematic because one will never feel happy fulfilling his desires 24/7. He also says that it isn't always beneficial to look out for one's self because they are usually the ones that are outcasted.
 * Unable to solve moral dilemmas (who gets the last soda?), though eogists may argue that it isn't a dilemma-solving theory.
 * Impractical to promote.
 * Egoists have to accept that the police officers in the 2022 Uvalde shooting are not at fault because they acted in their own, best interest.

Altruism
- Is every good act really "selfish" or can both benefit from a certain action (win-win scenario)?

Altruism argues that every once in a while, we can do an action completely for the benefit of another (ex, return a wallet). They do agree that there is always a 'good feeling', but that 'good feeling' being love for the act vs. make me feel better/look better - that's up for debate. Mosts altruists agree with British philosopher Midgley in that an act with the least amount of selfishness is a selfless act. Altruism puts an emphasis on the other person.

Reciprocal Altruism
By Peter Singer: looking out for others is beneficial to everyone (my own & other people's interests are relevant).


 * 1) Doing whatever one wills does not automatically improve survival: You may run away from the battlefield, but society's rejection of you would decrease your chances of living (egoism = decrease in your chances of living).
 * 2) Actually trying to look out for others increases survival: You win the battle on the field - your fellow soldiers may be likely to help you out in whatever issues you may need, therefore reciprocal altruism = increases your chances of surviving.