Ethical egoism

For other forms of egoism, see Egoism (disambiguation). chism.[3] These are political positions based partly on a
belief that individuals should not coercively prevent others from exercising freedom of action.
Ethical egoism is the normative ethical position that
moral agents ought to do what is in their own self-interest.
It diers from psychological egoism, which claims that
people can only act in their self-interest. Ethical ego- 1 Forms of ethical egoism
ism also diers from rational egoism, which holds that
it is rational to act in ones self-interest.[1] Ethical egoism holds that actions whose consequences will benet Ethical egoism can be broadly divided into three categories: individual, personal, and universal. An individual
the doer can be considered ethical.
ethical egoist would hold that all people should do whatEthical egoism contrasts with ethical altruism, which ever benets my (the individual) self-interest; a perholds that moral agents have an obligation to help oth- sonal ethical egoist would hold that he or she should act in
ers. Egoism and altruism both contrast with ethical his or her self-interest, but would make no claims about
utilitarianism, which holds that a moral agent should treat what anyone else ought to do; a universal ethical egoist
ones self (also known as the subject) with no higher re- would argue that everyone should act in ways that are in
gard than one has for others (as egoism does, by elevating their self-interest.[4][5]
self-interests and the self to a status not granted to others). But it also holds that one should not (as altruism
does) sacrice ones own interests to help others interests, so long as ones own interests (i.e. ones own desires 2 History
or well-being) are substantially equivalent to the others
interests and well-being. Egoism, utilitarianism, and al- Ethical egoism was introduced by the philosopher Henry
truism are all forms of consequentialism, but egoism and Sidgwick in his book The Methods of Ethics, written in
altruism contrast with utilitarianism, in that egoism and 1874. Sidgwick compared egoism to the philosophy of
altruism are both agent-focused forms of consequential- utilitarianism, writing that whereas utilitarianism sought
ism (i.e. subject-focused or subjective). However, util- to maximize overall pleasure, egoism focused only on
itarianism is held to be agent-neutral (i.e. objective and maximizing individual pleasure.[6]
impartial): it does not treat the subjects (i.e. the selfs,
i.e. the moral agents) own interests as being more or Philosophers before Sidgwick have also retroactively
less important than the interests, desires, or well-being of been identied as ethical egoists. One ancient example is the philosophy of Yang Zhu (4th century B.C.),
others.
Yangism, who views wei wo, or everything for myself,
Ethical egoism does not, however, require moral agents to as the only virtue necessary for self-cultivation.[7] Ancient
harm the interests and well-being of others when making Greek philosophers like Plato, Aristotle and the Stoics
moral deliberation; e.g. what is in an agents self-interest were exponents of virtue ethics, and did not accept the
may be incidentally detrimental, benecial, or neutral in formal principle that whatever the good is, we should seek
its eect on others. Individualism allows for others in- only our own good, or prefer it to the good of others.[6]
terest and well-being to be disregarded or not, as long as However, the beliefs of the Cyrenaics have been referred
what is chosen is ecacious in satisfying the self-interest to as a form of egoistic hedonism,[8] and while some reof the agent. Nor does ethical egoism necessarily entail fer to Epicurus hedonism as a form of virtue ethics, oththat, in pursuing self-interest, one ought always to do what ers argue his ethics are more properly described as ethical
one wants to do; e.g. in the long term, the fulllment egoism.[9]
of short-term desires may prove detrimental to the self.
Fleeting pleasure, then, takes a back seat to protracted
eudaimonia. In the words of James Rachels, Ethical
egoism [...] endorses selshness, but it doesn't endorse 3 Justications
foolishness.[2]
Ethical egoism is often used as the philosophical basis Philosopher James Rachels, in an essay that takes as its
for support of right-libertarianism and individualist anar- title the theorys name, outlines the three arguments most
commonly touted in its favor:[10]
1

4
The rst argument, writes Rachels, has several variations, each suggesting the same general
point:[11]
Each of us is intimately familiar with our own
individual wants and needs. Moreover, each
of us is uniquely placed to pursue those wants
and needs eectively. At the same time, we
know the desires and needs of others only imperfectly, and we are not well situated to pursue them. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe
that if we set out to be 'our brothers keeper,'
we would often bungle the job and end up doing more mischief than good.[2]
To pursue actively the interests of others is to
be ocious. We should mind our own business
and allow others to mind theirs.
To give charity to someone is to degrade him,
implying as it does that he is reliant on such
municence and quite unable to look out for
himself. That, reckons Rachels, is why the
recipients of 'charity' are so often resentful
rather than appreciative.[12]
Altruism, ultimately, denies an individual value and
is therefore destructive both to society and its individual components, viewing life merely as a thing to
be sacriced. Novelist Ayn Rand is quoted as writing that, "[i]f a man accepts the ethics of altruism,
his rst concern is not how to live his life but how to
sacrice it.[13] Moreover, "[t]he basic principle of
altruism is that man has no right to exist for his own
sake, that service to others is the only justication
for his existence, and that self-sacrice is his highest moral duty, virtue or value. Rather, she writes,
"[t]he purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer and die, but to enjoy yourself and live.[14]
All of our commonly accepted moral duties, from
doing no harm unto others to speaking always the
truth to keeping promises, are rooted in the one fundamental principle of self-interest.
It has been observed, however, that the very act of
eating (especially, when there are others starving in
the world) is such an act of self-interested discrimination. Ethical egoists such as Rand who readily acknowledge the (conditional) value of others to an individual, and who readily endorse empathy for others, have argued the exact reverse from Rachels, that
it is altruism which discriminates: If the sensation
of eating a cake is a value, then why is it an immoral
indulgence in your stomach, but a moral goal for you
to achieve in the stomach of others?"[15] It is therefore altruism which is an arbitrary position, according to Rand.

NOTABLE PROPONENTS

4 Notable proponents
The term ethical egoism has been applied retroactively
to philosophers such as Bernard de Mandeville and to
many other materialists of his generation, although none
of them declared themselves to be egoists. Note that materialism does not necessarily imply egoism, as indicated
by Karl Marx, and the many other materialists who espoused forms of collectivism. It has been argued that ethical egoism can lend itself to individualist anarchism such
as that of Benjamin Tucker, or the combined anarchocommunism and egoism of Emma Goldman, both of
whom were proponents of many egoist ideas put forward
by Max Stirner. In this context, egoism is another way of
describing the sense that the common good should be enjoyed by all. However, most notable anarchists in history
have been less radical, retaining altruism and a sense of
the importance of the individual that is appreciable but
does not go as far as egoism. Recent trends to greater
appreciation of egoism within anarchism tend to come
from less classical directions such as post-left anarchy or
Situationism (e.g. Raoul Vaneigem). Egoism has also
been referenced by anarcho-capitalists, such as Murray
Rothbard.
Philosopher Max Stirner, in his book The Ego and Its
Own, was the rst philosopher to call himself an egoist, though his writing makes clear that he desired not a
new idea of morality (ethical egoism), but rather a rejection of morality (amoralism), as a nonexistent and limiting spook; for this, Stirner has been described as the
rst individualist anarchist. Other philosophers, such as
Thomas Hobbes and David Gauthier, have argued that
the conicts which arise when people each pursue their
own ends can be resolved for the best of each individual
only if they all voluntarily forgo some of their aims
that is, ones self-interest is often best pursued by allowing
others to pursue their self-interest as well so that liberty
is equal among individuals. Sacricing ones short-term
self-interest to maximize ones long-term self-interest is
one form of "rational self-interest" which is the idea behind most philosophers advocacy of ethical egoism. Egoists have also argued that ones actual interests are not
immediately obvious, and that the pursuit of self-interest
involves more than merely the acquisition of some good,
but the maximizing of ones chances of survival and/or
happiness.
Philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche suggested that egoistic or life-arming behavior stimulates jealousy or
"ressentiment" in others, and that this is the psychological motive for the altruism in Christianity. Sociologist
Helmut Schoeck similarly considered envy the motive of
collective eorts by society to reduce the disproportionate gains of successful individuals through moral or legal
constraints, with altruism being primary among these.[16]
In addition, Nietzsche (in Beyond Good and Evil) and
Alasdair MacIntyre (in After Virtue) have pointed out that
the ancient Greeks did not associate morality with altru-

3
ism in the way that post-Christian Western civilization has
done. Aristotle's view is that we have duties to ourselves
as well as to other people (e.g. friends) and to the polis as
a whole. The same is true for Thomas Aquinas, Christian
Wol and Immanuel Kant, who claim that there are duties
to ourselves as Aristotle did, although it has been argued
that, for Aristotle, the duty to ones self is primary.[17]

vival and well-being, and argued that the social implications of morality, including natural rights, were simply a subset of the wider eld of ethics. Thus, for Rand,
virtue included productiveness, honesty with oneself,
and scrupulousness of thought. Although she greatly admired Jeerson, she also wrote:

Ayn Rand argued that there is a positive harmony of interests among free, rational humans, such that no moral
agent can rationally coerce another person consistently
with his own long-term self-interest. Rand argued that
other people are an enormous value to an individuals
well-being (through education, trade and aection), but
also that this value could be fully realized only under conditions of political and economic freedom. According to
Rand, voluntary trade alone can assure that human interaction is mutually benecial.[18] Rands student, Leonard
Peiko has argued that the identication of ones interests itself is impossible absent the use of principles, and
that self-interest cannot be consistently pursued absent a
consistent adherence to certain ethical principles.[19] Recently, Rands position has also been defended by such
writers as Tara Smith, Tibor Machan, Allan Gotthelf,
David Kelley, Douglas Rasmussen, Nathaniel Branden,
Harry Binswanger, Andrew Bernstein, and Craig Biddle.

[To those who say] that morality is social

and that man would need no morality on a
desert islandit is on a desert island that he
would need it most. Let him try to claim, when
there are no victims to pay for it, that a rock is a
house, that sand is clothing, that food will drop
into his mouth without cause or eort, that he
will collect a harvest tomorrow by devouring
his stock seed todayand reality will wipe him
out, as he deserves; reality will show him that
life is a value to be bought and that thinking is
the only coin noble enough to buy it.[22]

Philosopher David L. Norton identied himself an ethical individualist, and, like Rand, saw a harmony between
an individuals delity to his own self-actualization, or
personal destiny, and the achievement of societys well
being.[20]

Criticisms

In The Moral Point of View, Kurt Baier objects that ethical egoism provides no moral basis for the resolution of
conicts of interest, which, in his opinion, form the only
vindication for a moral code. Were this an ideal world,
one in which interests and purposes never jarred, its inhabitants would have no need of a specied set of ethics,
according to Baier. This, however, is not an ideal world.
Baier believes that ethical egoism fails to provide the
moral guidance and arbitration that it necessitates. Far
from resolving conicts of interest, claimed Baier, ethical egoism all too often spawns them. To this, as Rachels
has shown, the ethical egoist may object that he cannot
admit a construct of morality whose aim is merely to forestall conicts of interest. On his view, he writes, the
moralist is not like a courtroom judge, who resolves disputes. Instead, he is like the Commissioner of Boxing,
who urges each ghter to do his best.[23]

According to amoralism, there is nothing wrong with egoism, but there is also nothing ethical about it; one can
adopt rational egoism and drop morality as a superuous
Baiers is also part of a team of philosophers who hold
attribute of the egoism.
that ethical egoism is paradoxical, implying that to do
Ethical egoism has been alleged as the basis for
what is in ones best interests can be both wrong and right
immorality. Egoism has also been alleged as being outin ethical terms. Although a successful pursuit of selfside the scope of moral philosophy. Thomas Jeerson
interest may be viewed as a moral victory, it could also be
writes in an 1814 letter to Thomas Law:
dubbed immoral if it prevents another person from executing what is in his best interests. Again, however, the
Self-interest, or rather self-love, or egoism,
ethical egoists have responded by assuming the guise of
has been more plausibly substituted as the basis
the Commissioner of Boxing. His philosophy precludes
of morality. But I consider our relations with
empathy for the interests of others, so forestalling them
others as constituting the boundaries of moralis perfectly acceptable. Regardless of whether we think
ity. With ourselves, we stand on the ground
this is a correct view, adds Rachels, it is, at the very
of identity, not of relation, which last, requirleast, a consistent view, and so this attempt to convict the
ing two subjects, excludes self-love conned
egoist of self-contradiction fails.[24]
to a single one. To ourselves, in strict lanFinally, it has been averred that ethical egoism is no betguage, we can owe no duties, obligation reter than bigotry in that, like racism, it divides people into
quiring also two parties. Self-love, therefore,
two types themselves and others and discriminates
is no part of morality. Indeed, it is exactly its
against one type on the basis of some arbitrary disparity.
counterpart.[21]
This, to Rachelss mind, is probably the best objection
In contrast, Rand saw ethics as a necessity for human sur- to ethical egoism, for it provides the soundest reason why

REFERENCES

the interests of others ought to concern the interests of the [9] Evans, Matthew (2004). Can Epicureans be friends?".
Ancient Philosophy 24: 407424.
self. What, he asks, is the dierence between myself
and others that justies placing myself in this special cat[10] He notes, however, that the theory is asserted more often
egory? Am I more intelligent? Do I enjoy my life more?
than it is argued for. Many of its supporters apparently
Are my accomplishments greater? Do I have needs or
think its truth is self-evident, so that arguments are not
abilities that are so dierent from the needs and abilities
needed. (Rachels 2008, p. 534.)
of others? What is it that makes me so special? Failing
an answer, it turns out that Ethical Egoism is an arbitrary [11] That is, that regarding and pursuing the interests of others is a self-defeating policy. Rachels quotes Alexander
doctrine, in the same way that racism is arbitrary. [...]
Pope in support of this: Thus God and nature formed the
We should care about the interests of other people for
general frame/And bade self-love and social be the same.
the very same reason we care about our own interests; for
[25]
their needs and desires are comparable to our own.
[12] Rachels 2008, p. 534, where it is pointed out that, in

See also
Adam Smith and the invisible hand
Baruch Spinoza
Epicurus
Thomas Hobbes
Behavioral economics
Crvka, an egoistic Indian philosophy
Hedonism
Helping behavior
Objectivism (Ayn Rand)
Prot motive

the strictest egoistic terms, this is an inconsequential argument. Ethical egoism does not bother itself with how others receive charity, irrespective of how degraded it makes
them feel. The same reasoning applies to the previous
two bullets, which use self-interest as a means to the end
of benecence, rather than for its own purposes, as the
theory would dictate.
[13] Rachels 2008, p. 535, where this argument is attributed to
Ayn Rand, a writer little heeded by professional philosophers but who nevertheless was enormously popular on
college campuses in the 1960s and 1970s.
[14] Rand, Ayn, Faith and Force: Destroyers of the Modern
World, Philosophy: Who Needs It, p. 74; Atlas Shrugged,
1957, Random House, p.1014; Faith and Force, p. 74.
[15] Rand, Ayn, Atlas Shrugged, 1957, Random House.
[16] Schoeck, Helmut, Der Neid. Eine Theorie der Gesellschaft
(Envy. A Theory of Social Behaviour), 1966, 1st English
ed. 1969.

Rational expectations

[17] Wheeler, Jack, Rand and Aristotle, in Den Uyl and Rasmussen, The Philosophic Thought of Ayn Rand, 1986.

Yangism, an egoistic Chinese philosophy

[18] Rand, Ayn, The Virtue of Selshness(1964).

Footnotes

[1] Sanders, Steven M. Is egoism morally defensible?

Philosophia. Springer Netherlands. Volume 18, Numbers
23 / July 1988
[2] Rachels 2008, p. 534.
[3] Ridgely, D.A. (August 24, 2008). Selshness, Egoism
and Altruistic Libertarianism. Retrieved 2008-08-24.

[19] Peiko, Leonard, Why Should One Act on Principle?,

The Objectivist Forum, 1988, originally delivered at the
Ford Hall Forum.
[20] Norton, David, Personal Destinies: A Philosophy of Ethical Individualism, 1976, Princeton University Press.
[21] Jeerson, Thomas. June 13, 1814. The Moral Sense.
Teaching American History (accessed 3 August 2007)
[22] Rand, Ayn, Atlas Shrugged, 1957, Random House, p.
1018.

[4] Waller (2005), p. 81.

[23] Rachels 2008, p. 538.

[5] Waller (2005), p. 83.

[24] Rachels 2008, p. 539.

[6] Floridi, Luciano; Craig, Edward. Egoism and Altruism.

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Taylor & Francis.
pp. 246247. ISBN 9780415187091.

[25] Rachels 2008, pp. 539540.

[7] Senghaas, Dieter (2002). The clash within civilizations:

coming to terms with cultural conicts. Psychology Press.
p. 33. ISBN 978-0-415-26228-6.
[8] Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Cyrenaics

8 References
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics.
Aristotle, Eudemian Ethics.

5
Evans, Matthew (2004). Can Epicureans be
friends?". Ancient Philosophy 24: 407424.
Baier, Kurt, 1990, Egoism in A Companion to
Ethics, Peter Singer (ed.), Blackwell: Oxford. ISBN
978-0-631-18785-1
Biddle, Craig, Loving Life: The Morality of SelfInterest and the Facts that Support It, 2002, Glen
Allen.
Branden, Nathaniel, The Psychology of Self-Esteem,
1969, Nash.
Hobbes, Thomas, 1968, Leviathan, C. B. Macpherson (ed.), Harmondsworth: Penguin. ISBN 978-014-043195-7
Machan, Tibor, Classical Individualism: The
Supreme Importance of Each Human Being, 1998,
Routledge.
Nietzsche, Friedrich, 1886, Beyond Good and Evil.
Norton, David, Personal Destinies: A Philosophy of
Ethical Individualism, 1976, Princeton University
Press.
Paul, E. & F. Miller & J. Paul (1997). Self-Interest.
Cambridge University Press
Peiko, Leonard, Why Should One Act on Principle?, The Objectivist Forum, 1988.
Rachels, James. Ethical Egoism. In Reason &
Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems
of Philosophy, edited by Joel Feinberg and Russ
Shafer-Landau, 532540. California: Thomson
Wadsworth, 2008. ISBN 978-0-495-50069-8.
Rand, Ayn, Atlas Shrugged, 1957, Random House.
Rand, Ayn, 1964, The Virtue of Selshness. Signet.
ISBN 978-0-451-16393-6
Rosenstand, Nina. 2000. 'Chapter 3: Myself or
Others?'. In The Moral of the Story. (3rd Edition).
Mountain View, Calif: Mayeld Publishing: 127
167. ISBN 978-0-07-296335-9
Schoeck, Helmut, Der Neid. Eine Theorie der
Gesellschaft (Envy: A Theory of Social Behaviour),
1966, 1st English ed. 1969.
Smith, Tara, Viable Values: A Study of Life as the
Root and Reward of Morality, 2000, Rowman & Littleeld. ISBN 0-8476-9760-6.
Smith, Tara, The Virtuous Egoist: Ayn Rands Normative Ethics, 2006, Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 0-521-86050-4.
Waller, Bruce, N. 2005. Egoism. In Consider
Ethics: Theory, Readings, and Contemporary Issues.
New York: Pearson Longman: 7983. ISBN 9780-321-20280-2

9 External links
Egoism entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Ethical egoism entry in the Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy
Merriam-Webster Dictionary entry for egoism

10

10
10.1

TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

Text

Ethical egoism Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_egoism?oldid=683142445 Contributors:
Bryan Derksen, AstroNomer~enwiki, Ryguasu, R Lowry, Michael Hardy, Egil, Poor Yorick, TonyClarke, Jod, JASpencer, Charles Matthews, Aerothorn,
Nikodemos, Wighson, Lussmu~enwiki, Gadum, SoWhy, Quadell, Karl-Henner, Absinf, Tom X. Tobin, Rich Farmbrough, Bishonen,
Dpotter, El C, Lycurgus, Zenohockey, Skywalker, VBGFscJUn3, Jumbuck, Jaardon, RJII, Mel Etitis, Woohookitty, Kzollman,
Tabletop, FayssalF, YurikBot, RussBot, RL0919, Acerimusdux, Igin, GraemeL, Jonathan.s.kt, Ghazer~enwiki, Zvika, NickelShoe,
KnightRider~enwiki, SmackBot, Rnin, Gilliam, Jaymay, Cybercobra, Nakon, Byelf2007, The Man in Question, Nehrams2020, AlexLibman, JRSpriggs, Robin Kerrison, ShelfSkewed, WeggeBot, Gregbard, Jasperdoomen, Pais, Peterdjones, Gogo Dodo, Mattisse, Mojo Hand,
Skomorokh, Matthew Fennell, Gekedo, VoABot II, Dchem, MartinBot, Bradgib, Anarchia, Makswel, NerdyNSK, Rammstein Viking,
Robertson-Glasgow, Jevansen, Nat682, Halmstad, TXiKiBoT, Vlad.savov, Radiooperator, Broadbot, Lova Falk, Gerakibot, ClueBot,
Awesomebitch, Saddhiyama, Chimp23, ComputerGeezer, Adriansrfr, DumZiBoT, FrankAndProust, Appellative, Jpoelma13, Eivindbot,
Lightbot, Koochekhalvat~enwiki, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Apollonius 1236, Eduen, Plasticbot, KosovoLegacy, Killiondude, Piano
non troppo, Materialscientist, Jmundo, Jadabocho, Brandonk2009, Shadowjams, NoldorinElf, FrescoBot, RandomStringOfCharacters,
Tim1357, BandBHawks, John of Reading, GoingBatty, Jacquelinebond, SZJX, H3llBot, Movses-bot, Dbeiler, Thespeaker8, Eman2129,
Theconsequentialist, Biroise, Mdabram, Oolyons, Maximus6815, Firstborne, ChrisGualtieri, JYBot, Vanished user sdij4rtltkjasdk3, I am
One of Many, Aubreybardo, G alphawolfe, Fermezlabouchee, Lope5210, You better look out below! and Anonymous: 122

10.2

Images

10.3

Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0