What Is Wrong With Psychological Egoism? Essay Example

The principle of psychological egoism is based on the concept that humans will do whatever they need to survive. This contradicts other social theories, as the major factor that separates humans from animals is that humans are able to think about their actions prior to committing them, while animals act instinctively. Therefore, it is expected that we will not always act in a selfish manner. It is important to consider, however, the conditions that must be in place for psychological egoism to occur. This is often in the case of environmental or physical extremes, in which if one individual commits his or herself to helping another, it may compromise their own survival.

According to “What is wrong with psychological egoism?”, the theory states that it is “vain to expect humans to be genuinely moved by the interests of others” and that “the management of human behavior and activity ought to be keyed to self-interest”. Ultimately, it would be unfair of us to consider it appropriate for humans to put others before themselves all of the time and that human behaviors should be considered appropriate if they are done in an act of self-interest. The article claims that these assumptions about human behavior are incorrect because we cannot hold humans to the same standards as beings that exist in nature. We have evolved in a manner that has allowed us to be removed from nature, and we cannot make excuses for our mannerisms on this basis.

It is clear that the concept of egoism evolved from altruism, which is the caring for others without the potential for a reward. It is clear based on our many observations of human nature that people are not always altruistic. Therefore, there was a need to develop a different psychological theory to describe human behavior. Rather than considering intermediate behaviors, the authors of the egoist ideology claimed that behavior is based primarily on our primal instincts, which is the complete opposite of altruism. However, neither of these concepts appropriately describe human behavior because none of us are completely good or completely evil. Rather, a majority of our personality’s tends to fall somewhere between these two extremes.

An important portion of the article that contradicts the belief that human actions are guided primarily by egoism is that “we have deliberate control over both the scope and term of our self-interest”. While humans are all self-interested, we have the ability to take a step back and care for others because we choose to do so. If we are self-interested, it is not because of innate uncontrollable personality or instinct, it is because we recognize that we have a want or need that should be fulfilled. When we are considering basic needs, such as food or water, we are more likely to tend towards nature and claim these items for ourselves when competition is present. However, when all of our needs are met and these requirements for life are in a surplus, we are more likely to behave altruistically and share what we have with others.

It appears that the ability of humans to behave either altruistically or egotistically is dependent upon unique physical and social needs. Evolutionarily, humans have trended towards altruism due to the recognition that survival would increase if everyone lived closely and collaborated with one another to ensure that there would be an adequate amount of food, clothing, and shelter. To ensure that these basic needs are met, there is occasionally a need to act as a social unit, which makes humans and non-human primates to be unique from other animals. We have a choice to avoid acting egotistically in order to ensure that a social group will benefit. In a sense, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and this confers the ability to survive. This also demonstrates that there is no need to behave as an egoist unless a desperate situation occurs.

The take home message from this article is that to ensure survival of the individual, it would be beneficial to identify with the interests of others, thereby making them ours. It is essential to the human experience to discover those that we find to be agreeable and to befriend them. When we work in groups, we are able to accomplish far more than we would be able to individually, which increases our chance of survival. In conclusion, this article rejects the concept that egoism dictates how humans behave. It is not effective compared to altruism and altruism/egoism intermediates. It is best for humans to live and work in groups to ensure that their basic needs could be met. Although many animals in nature tend towards egoism, humans are unique because we have the ability to choose to not behave like this. Since we have the right to choose, we should make these choices in a manner that confers advantage. Therefore, to survive, we must forget about working individually and instead work together.