Are we, as humans, driven only by psychological egoism?
Bentham had claimed that psychological egoism is natural and universal (Chapter
12-3b) meaning we are mainly interested in our own welfare first and foremost. To
me, this question is rather loaded with a lot of variables that make it a bit
difficult to find a simple answer to.
Going back to the basic statement, before diving in depth
into society aspects of it, I’ll share my own thoughts to answer the question I
posed at the beginning. People seek pleasure for themselves with minimum pain,
is what many philosophers have come to believe. To a degree I think that that
statement is true. We do tend to make decisions, whether subconsciously or not,
that benefit us. Though I don’t believe we are completely driven by our own
psychological egoism. There are people in this world who will sacrifice their
own pleasure, take on the pain, to better someone else’s life.
As a mother, I no longer think about what is best for me. My
children come first and my decisions are to maximize their pleasure with
minimal pain. It can’t be mainly about my desires and not theirs because then I
would fail as a parent. No, in my mind, as I’m sure it is for many other
parents, the pleasure of our children comes before our own no matter the
expense to us it is. As a partner in a serious relationship, it is not purely
about what benefits me. Though I guess in the long run, things could perhaps
benefit me and I cannot consciously see it. Such as my partner is thinking
about joining the military and I can currently only see the pain that will
bring me, however I will be there every step of the way to support my
significant other because it will cause more pleasure for him than his current
situation.
From the standpoint of a society, psychological egoism is
quite a bit different. There are a lot more aspects that go into it. In chapter
12-3b it lists a couple of examples of situations where the benefit to yourself
is more than just the immediate benefit or harm. The one particular example
that stuck out to me is that one may no longer want to pay taxes that support
the school system because either they don’t have children that attend public
schools, or their children are already through with school. So, those people
only see that the taxes paying for the school as negatively impacting
themselves and wanting to get rid of it. However, they do not realize that
without the taxes that go into the schools, there will be less jobs, less
children being educated, which will result in more people needing to be on
welfare and welfare is taken out of everyone’s taxes. So, when it come to the
society point of egoism, there are a lot more aspects to consider if something
is going to bring more pleasure than pain to each individual. Also, when it
comes to the society standpoint, you working toward improving the society, you
must think more about the good for a larger amount of people than just a small
amount, hedonism.
dibs
ReplyDeletePeer Comments by IsaacClarke
ReplyDeleteTotal number of words in the post: 551
Spelling errors: None that I found
Grammatical errors: None that I found
Lack of clarity: Very clear and easy to follow
Organization of ideas: very organized and did not jump back and forth
Did the author answer their question? Yes they did answer their question.
Did the author provide a concrete example that clearly illustrates their main point? Yes they included examples and personal experiences. They said that their children are the most important thing in their life.
How does the author’s concrete example illustrate or not illustrate their main point? Their example states that their children come first then they do which does in fact illustrate their main point.
Do you agree or disagree with the author’s answer and why? I agree because we do tend to put ourselves first but not always especially when it comes to loved ones.
What is a concrete example that clearly illustrates why you agree or disagree with the author? The example that illustrates why I agree with the author is that a lot of people put their family first before them.
What is your explanation of how your concrete example clearly illustrates your reason for why you agree or disagree with the author? My explanation is that I also put my family first and try to make them happy.
I am glad someone else understands my point of view. Family is just the main reason why I don't think human beings are purely driven by psychological egoism.
DeleteNice review Issac.
DeleteAre we, as humans, driven only by psychological egoism? Bentham had claimed that psychological egoism is natural and universal (Chapter 12-3b)[,] meaning we are mainly interested in our own welfare first and foremost. To me, this question is rather loaded with a lot of variables that make it a bit difficult to find a simple answer to.
ReplyDeleteGoing back to the basic statement, before diving in depth into society<--[Replace with "the social"] aspects of it, I’ll share my own thoughts to answer the question I posed at the beginning. [That] [p]eople seek pleasure for themselves with minimum pain, is what many philosophers have come to believe. To a degree I think that that statement is true. We do tend to make decisions, whether subconsciously or not, that benefit us. Though I don’t believe we are completely driven by our own psychological egoism. There are people in this world who will sacrifice their own pleasure, take on the pain, to better someone else’s life.
As a mother, I no longer think about what is best for me. My children come first and my decisions are to maximize their pleasure with minimal pain. <--[Do you think that sometimes this rule for child rearing might be problematic. In other words, do you think that there might be some "pains" that children should be exposed to? For example, the "pain" of trying to figure out a difficult problem, etc. You also might want to check out Carol Dweck's book Mindset. It's really great advice for parents and kids.]
It can’t be mainly about my desires and not their[']s because then I would fail as a parent. No, in my mind, as I’m sure it is for many other parents, the pleasure of our children comes before our own no matter the expense to us it is.<--[Wow, that's quite a claim. Do you think parents ought to sacrifice themselves to the point in which things become detrimental to the parent so that the parent can ensure their children's happiness, at least for the time being? What might happen in the long term if parents did that?]
As a partner in a serious relationship, it is not purely about what benefits me. Though I guess in the long run, things could perhaps benefit me and I cannot consciously see it. Such as<--[Replace with "For example."] my partner is thinking about joining the military and I can currently only see the pain that will bring me, however[,] I will be there every step of the way to support my significant other because it will cause more pleasure for him than his current situation.<--[Would him being happier with his job also make things possibly better for you and your family too? If not, I would think that would be a problem considering the fact that you two are partners, and given this one should consider what kind of significance the happiness of the other should have on their own happiness. Personally speaking, I think decisions like jobs and such for those who have partners ought to involve a discussion of how those jobs can benefit everyone involved.]
ReplyDeleteFrom the standpoint of a society, psychological egoism is quite a bit different. There are a lot more aspects that go into it. [C]hapter 12-3b [lists] a couple of examples of situations where the benefit to yourself is more than just the immediate benefit or harm. The one particular example that stuck out to me is that one may no longer want to pay taxes that support the school system because either they don’t have children that attend public schools, or their children are already through with school. So, those people only see that the taxes paying for the school as negatively impacting themselves and wanting to get rid of it. However, they do not realize that without the taxes that go into the schools, there will be less jobs, less children being educated, which will result in more people needing to be on welfare and welfare is taken out of everyone’s taxes. So, when it come to the society point of egoism,<--[You might want to rephrase this. The way you wrote it is a bit awkward.] there are a lot more aspects to consider if something is going to bring more pleasure than pain to each individual. Also, when it comes to the society standpoint, you working toward improving the society, you must think more about the good for a larger amount of people than just a small amount, hedonism.
[Overall, your writing is not very problematic, but you might want to proof-read your work a bit more. Perhaps take it to the writing center and have them help you with proof-reading. You use some phrases in a somewhat ungrammatical way. It should help if you were able to correct this. One thing you might try is to look up the phrase usage online. I do this sometimes. When I have a phrase in mind that I want to use, I try to check its use online to makes sure I am using it correctly.]
Best wishes,
Dr. Mun