Arguments Against Ethical Egoism

Ethics and morality are often used interchangeably in colloquial modern English. Though there are several key distinctions between the two, one thing that unifies both concepts is the reliance on logical thought and reason from those who practice philosophy. From Socrates to Hobbes, the greatest philosophical minds have wrestled with the interplay of morality, ethics, and reason. This paper will examine this interplay within the paradigm of egoism. First, this paper will define the subsets of egoism, the reasons for and against its argumentation, and finally the consequences of accepting either psychological egoism or ethical egoism.
Egoism is the idea that the ultimate moral motivation for humans is self-interest. There are two main distinctions
A primary argument for egoism is the strongest desires argument. This argument claims that every decision resulting in an action one makes is made out of that individual's strongest desires. Thus, whenever someone decisively acts, they are doing so out of self-interest. However, a counterexample to the strongest desires argument is the conscientious actor argument. Sometimes, people choose between their strongest desires and purely altruistic means. Egoists tend to deny such a theoretical actor because the strictly conscientious action is difficult to achieve without bias one way or
With psychological egoism, the primary argument is that altruism cannot exist due to the extremely driven self-interested nature of humans. However, where this argument falls short is in providing counter argumentation. By making a categorical assertion about moral action and the nature of morality, psychological egoism is untestable. Though the premise "humans always act out of self-interest" implies that altruism cannot exist, the lack of evidence against this claim falls short. We, therefore, cannot prove that altruism does not exist, and thus we cannot prove the