How does utilitarianism differ from ethical egoism

Self-Interest Egoism : Type information here. There are two basic kinds of egoism, there is ethical egoism and there is psychological egoism. These two different forms of egoism are different because ethical egoism is the normative ethical position that what is moral is to be done in self-interest. This is different from psychological egoism which states specifically that people will only act in their own self-interest.

Ethical egoism is broken up into two forms. There is act egoism and Rule egoism. Act egoism. Ethical Egoism vs. Utilitarianism The concepts within Ethical Egoism and Utilitarianism show the way in which they teach people to act in a form that is most moral in society.

In order for us to achieve a more ethical society, we must look into the ways that people can change their actions to adjust to needs of the individual or the whole group.

Whose needs should be met first in any type of situation is the question that should be determined based on these two ideals. An ethical society is one that provides virtuous, just appeal while still having the ability to be flexible due to the fact that society is always changing. To make up the ethics , we look to those with high intelligence such as scholars as well as people in power of …show more content… Developing your mind and enhancing your spiritual relationship with God may be a part of one's self-interest and is a way for them to find life more fulfilling.

Another concept to this is that one follows Ethical Egoism by living a better overall lifestyle that involves that person striving to be healthier and more flexible in order to face any struggles that come their way.

Believing that they are more situated for work and physical activity provides them with the feeling of achievement within themselves. Another form of Ethical Egoism could be an individual benefiting at the cost of others such as a survival situation.

If the individual holds more power than the rest of the group, then they could use that to their advantage whether it be physical or mental strengths. Ethical Egoism stresses the idea that individuals who act on their own self-interests and follow them all the way through society are making the greatest amount of good, in this case, for themselves. Utilitarianism is an idea that focuses on the increasing the amount of good in the world or the overall happiness of the group.

Egoism states that the good consequences for the individual agent outweigh the consequences placed upon others.

In egoism, actions could be considered ethical for the individual if the one taking the action is benefited, while any benefit or detriment to the welfare of others is a side effect and not as important as the consequences for the individual. The primary differences between these two theories, keeping in mind that there are numerous sub-theories within each branch of thought, is the value placed between the individual and others. In utilitarianism, the most ethical action may be that which harms the individual agent but maximizes the positive impact for the most people overall, essentially placing the emphasis on the whole as opposed to the individual.

In egoism, the individual has a greater value than others, thus it is ethical to act in one's own self-interest even if it may potentially harm others. Utilitarianism seeks to maximize good by minimizing harm to all while egoism seeks to maximize good by keeping the individual happy. In utilitarianism, actions must be judged on the amount of people or beings that benefit from the action as opposed to how many the same action may potentially harm.

If you pass through door A, you will experience a less painful but significant shock. If you pass through door B, you will not experience this shock, but some other person, a stranger and out of sight, will suffer a shock of the same intensity…. Surely you have a reason—a strong reason—to choose door B over door A grounded in the fact that it is that door which will significantly promote your well-being Since some others do, I see how this might be an effective argument for agent-relative reasons.

It is not really, however, the argument of 1. That argument promised a justification for agent-relative reasons that goes beyond just giving cases in which some think we have them. I think Sidgwick intends something weaker. In the Methods , after noting 2. The point seems to be that if someone thought that the distinction between one individual and another did matter to choosing between egoism and utilitarianism, it is hard to see how to show that such a person is wrong.

It does not follow that one must think it matters. He, and egoists, take it to be relevant to setting ultimate ends. Others, such as utilitarians, may disagree. The application of the tests for highest certainty in III. XIII, which seemed at least to have established consequentialism, and which elsewhere Sidgwick endorses as the best way of justifying beliefs, seems to have been forgotten Earlier I suggested that there is a gap between the axioms and utilitarianism.

If so, Sidgwick has reason to think the tests are insufficient: they secure the axioms but not utilitarianism. On my view, the appeal to the tests succeeds in establishing the axioms—which is why Sidgwick does not note that the argument of III.

XIII fails. Green, Mr. Spencer, and J. Voir la notice dans le catalogue OpenEdition. Navigation — Plan du site. Dossier Sidgwick.