Egoism eh?
I will admit that I find the idea of egoism attractive. If well being is the concern of the Good then in would make sense that the well being of the self would be the reason for acting. That is acting in concern for one's own well being. Act Egoism though seems as if it would produce only consequentialist normative factors and I cannot accept that. Perhaps it wouldn't. I have to consider the possiblity that there are other goods than well being but Iam not sure what sense to make of them. They might be only instrumentally good with regard to well being. However me feeling is that there are goods out there that are infact intrinsically good other than well being and that well being should not be persued to the exclusion of these goods. Then what is the difference between the "Goodness" pursued here and the one's own well being? Or rather what value does Goodness have if not for the increase (knowingly or unknowingly) of one's own well being? If one where to take well being to be a hedonistic sort then perhaps one could pursue a Good at the expense of one's own well being. This would not be in line with egoism though. But if that which is of supreme importance is eudaimonia, then it would seem that the singular pursuit of Good would be of one's own namely to have a good character. In that sense it has been said that no ill can befall a man of good character. But is this an egoist way? I want to say no actually it isn't exactly. The man of good character will act justly and so when he acts justly his well being increases, in this case I think that the increase of one's well being is a by product of acting justly and rightly. So if this is the case then I do not think egoism can be a foundational theory.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home