Developing Personal Ethics in view of Psychological Egoism

Post Reply New Topic

I believe all human decisions can be explained deterministically, more specifically, based on psychological egoism.

Psychological egoism: the view that humans are always motivated by self-interest, even in what seem to be acts of altruism".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_egoism

This view presents a dilemma.

How does one develop personal ethics when truly believing that selfishness is the true cause of motivation?

And does this mean the unthinkable, and one should embrace what the "evil" people say:
- "Greed is Good" (Gordon Gekko)
- "Selfishness is a virtue" (Ayn Rand)
- "Peace is a lie, there is only passion" (Sith Code)
- "Will to Power" the will to achievement, ambition over others is truth (Nietzsche)

Thoughts? thanks.

People can either be corroborative or competitive... I don't think it's deterministic in the sense of a physical, clockwork universe whose particles can be calculated... people do have choice, and we can see in many countries who are competitive war is more likely, economies at an even worse state... so, in the end it may be a rational decision, but sure enough, a narcissistic Hitler can always bring the edifice down.

Psychological studies show that believing that peoples act selfishly make peoples act more selfishly; thus psychological egoism is a major element of what is wrong in today society. I don't believe it anyway, as peoples can be sometimes selfless to the point of self-sacrifice. As for what psychological egoism is saying about altruistic conduct been motivated by the "good feeling" afterward, consider this; why is the main reason we are eating? Is it from the pleasure of eating or simply because we are hungry? Even though we sometime eat for pleasure, it seem to me that hunger is a major element.

I think people aren't always motivated by self-interest.

Some are successfully deceived into always letting someone else's interests prevail, often because they stick literally to the morals they were taught during their upbringing, while others learn to bend the rules in their favor and exploit loopholes.

Some actually honor commitments they made even when it'd be more advantageous for them to backstab the other party, and therefore lose when they have to compete with those who do backstab in the same situation, and also get screwed by clever rule benders and loophole exploiters.

Some are so used to being powerless they have no idea what actions, if any, would favor their self-interest, or, more likely, would harm it the least.

There's also the perpetual allure of irrationality when it's hard to make rational decisions, especially if there are peers pushing you to abandon reason.

As always, the way to impose your self-interest over that of others is to be stronger than them.

The problem lies not in what motivates people, but in what they value and strive to attain. This is why formal ethical systems and social controls (like shame) are important.

For example, in ancient Rome people were greedy, but during the best years of the Republic, public service was valued and admired. The great men would act with generosity and benevolence toward their clients and the Roman state because THEY WANTED to be admired. Then they would go out and ruthlessly exploit the provinces because that was socially acceptable and they could get their greed on.

Later, these values began to erode and the great men became less benevolent and more predatory in general. This caused lots of social/economic tensions (and worse) and contributed to the breack down of the Republic.

Yeah, that makes sense, and what I was getting at.


I think people get programmed to believe that "self-sacrifice" is a great honor, a great attainment.

Islamic bombers, Kamikaze pilots, soldiers who fall on grenades, all prioritize self-sacrifice as a show of their self-worth.

I am a great solider, because I am willing to kill myself for others.

So, I still see them as selfish.


Whether for "hunger" or "pleasure" it's still about fulfilling the self.

Do you have a specific example?

"Shaming" seems to be on the decline though; it's deemed not "politically correct".

I'm not sure that's true. I think that what we see as shame worthy has changed.

Also, the PC folks try to use shame, but the folks they try to shame are increasingly immune to it.

That's Trump's superpower. He has no sense of shame. This lets him get away with saying such outrageous things. It also inspires and liberates others who agree with him, but do (or did) have a sense of shame.


I think this is a big reason why some people are so devoted to him.

I don't think this poses a problem for morality. Selfishness in this context could only be considered immoral if it is to the detriment of others, in which case it's not really the same thing. Eating food is a completely selfish act, yet nobody would consider this immoral.

The fact that NOBODY wants to pay taxes anymore is an example of selfishness that hurts the common good.

Taxes are the price of admission for living in civilization, but these days everyone is jumping the turnstile.

That cannot last.

Turn out most peoples are well intentioned.

http://evonomics.com/not-selfish-economists-think-heres-proof-genuinely-good/