Ethical Egoism Vs Utilitarianism

The theories of Utilitarianism and Ethical egoism differ in many ways, however, they are both similar in the aspect of making choices and having the best outcome for those choices. Ethical egoism claims that an action must be morally right and completely maximize ones own self-interest or interests. The “opposing theory” Utilitarianism, states that an action must be one that produces the most good overall or to all those affected. Utilitarianism and Ethical egoism are forms of consequentialism in that; the right choice is based entirely off the consequences that are produced. Ethical egoism however, is a normative philosophical view, in that it describes how people “should” act in a situation. Ethical egoism is completely different from many theories because the interest of others is never a factor in any decision that is made. It believes that sacrificing ones self should only benefit ones own future rather than actually helping those involved. An ethical egoist should only act upon a situation if it will truly benefit them. For example, if a child was caught in a burning building and you were the only person who could save it, you should only intervene if the publicity would advance you further in life. However, it might not be beneficial if you get burned or dehydrated from saving the child.
Utilitarianism believes that everyone and everything should benefit from a situation.
This theory believes that this type of decision making could be beneficial in that, it promotes a “happier” world and gives one a sense of purpose in doing an action. Believed to be pleasure seeking creatures, some humans would choose the “overall” decision because their conscious would make them feel as if they did a service to not only themselves but everyone involved. It believes in supporting the overall good in any and every situation, for example if someone had to die to save two people this theory would fully support that
decision. These two differ in that obviously we cant and wont know the outcome of every situation. For example, If a family member and two strangers were dying and you only have time to save one or the other, Ethical egoism would support the decision in favor of a family member because it will likely benefit ones own self. However, the Utilitarian approach to this situation would be impossible ultimately preventing it. That eventually ones own instincts would take over in favor of those you love, unraveling the theory. Many decision we have to make are quick, this is easy for an Ethical Egoist, choosing in ones own favor is easy, verses a Utilitarian who must calculate the overall outcome of the situation before making a decision. Which could ultimately make one side of the decision un-attainable. Some believe that an Ethical egoism driven society would lead to complete anarchy. Which in turn would benefit no one, including the egoist. Creating a society that no one would want to live in because each member of society would constantly be working against one another in every situation. Making it impossible to completely benefit ones own self, verses the Utilitarian approach of helping the greater good of society to be one that everyone live in because of the added support preventing the Ethical egoist approach.