In other way we can state that it is always moral to promote self-interest and it is not moral not to promote it. So it is a moral duty of every person to pursue his or her own interest. According to Ethical Egoism, there is only one ultimate principle of conduct, the principle of self-interest, and this principle sums up all of one’s natural duties and obligations. The only way, through which you can help others, according to Ethical Egoism, if it is in someone’s best interest to help others. Ethical Egoism talks only about the self-interest which is better for the person over long run.
Hsun Tzu pushed the fact that man must be taught to be good, I agree with this idea because everyone makes mistakes which we normally learn from. If we don’t learn from them then we would just continue to make the same mistakes. He also state that there are sages working to help man learn to be good. In my opinion, man learns from himself just as much as he learns from someone else. Mencius felt greed might eventually push man to turn evil.
This social expectation is crucial to break because society should be encouraging people to be friendly when around strangers, not the opposite. In Thoreau's essay, “Civil Disobedience”, Thoreau exemplifies the ideas Emerson explains in his own essay “Self-Reliance”; therefore suggesting that Emerson would agree with the arguments of Thoreau. Through out the essays of Thoreau and Emerson, they both reiterate the same ideas, yet Thoreau furthers the arguments with an action, implying that the two men would agree with each other. In, “Self Reliance,” Emerson states, “The harm of the improved machinery may compensate its good” (16). The “harm” Emerson speaks of is that society, with machines, will no longer with self-sufficient.
The worlds where there are characters that help readers examine the world of Altruism and Egoism. Altruism is the philosophy of finding principles in living for others or for society. Ayn Rand makes a list of different characters that surrounds a man’s ego creating The Fountainhead. Ayn Rand creates the individualistic power in a society and also creates another side that believes in selflessness. The character Peter Keating embodies altruism and only feels he shouldn’t exist for his own sake but the services that he receives from others reason for existing is for fame and approval for others.
According to Kant, right actions are not done by following inclinations, impulses or obeying the principle of greatest happiness but are done simply and purely from the sense of duty. Kessler says that some ethical truths and norms are appropriate to everyone in the society, and therefore, people should always act morally irrespective of the outcome for their morals. In deontology ethics, actions are done for the sake of duty. The intrinsic moral feature determines the rightness or wrongness of the act taken by individuals. The duty should always be done by taking the right.
In fact, according to Kant, a person who hates helping others but does so anyways because they see it as their societal duty is a good moral agent. On the other hand, a person who enjoys helping others because it brings them joy would be considered selfish and without any moral content. How can this make sense? Hume would argue that it is the passion to help those that are less fortunate that motivates the individual rather than the actual act. In general, the action is produced by a passion to do something, spurred on by feelings of guilt or perhaps philanthropy.
Superson’s goal is to defeat the skeptic and does not believe self-interest is sufficient enough to do so. I understand the approach Superson is making about self-interest but I don’t think she is looking at all aspects of the topic. I think people will always act in self-interested ways regardless of the circumstances; people act according to their dispositions, not by force, unless they are being coerced of course. It is human nature to instinctively maximize our personal utility. We act in ways that we see fit, whether or not an act is considered moral is completely dependent upon the individual.
Socrates believed that people should evaluate their lives and become ethically responsible. He often considered people should not seek money or power but to become morale correct in society. One of Machiavelli’s famous quote: “It is better to be feared than loved.” He believed that leaders should do anything necessary to gain and maintain power. How can two people with opposite moral have the same ethical beliefs? Socrates and Machiavelli were both humanist philosophers.
It is based on different virtues that a person should have, so that they can then reach Euadamonia. Euadamonia should be the end goal to everyone's life and it is the ultimate happiness. Virtue Ethics is ‘agent centred’ and it focuses on the qualities of the person making the moral choices rather than the actual moral choice that they are making, which can bring weaknesses to the theory as one can justify mostly anything by using virtue ethics. According to the theory, morality is about becoming the right sort of person, it is not asking “what should I do?”, but it is asking “what sort of person should I be?”, and is not trying to find rights and wrongs, just allow you to become a good person. Virtue ethics is agent-centred ethics rather than act-centred.
The Ethical Lens Inventory also implies that my blind spot is that I believe that motive justifies method. It says that I may unintentionally cause people upset and pain because I am so focused on my good motive, and that I tend to believe that ethnics is a set of universal rules that everyone should follow, just as I do. I believe that my strengths are that I will always perform my duties to satisfy the goal of my employer on my own and without supervision. I’m not dependent on a team or group. I feel my weaknesses would be that I may come across to others as bossy and everyone will be held