Altruism Cannot Co-exist with Psychological Egoism

The Tale of Gyges: A Reflection on Psychological Egoism and Altruism

After reading the Tale of Gyges, it is easy to see an extreme version of psychological egoism. Meaning that the one thing that motivates humans to do something is their own self-interest. This concept, illustrated in the story of Gyges, suggests that humans are inherently driven by the desire to fulfill their own needs and desires. However, there is also an argument that altruism exists. Altruism means that one can have the desire to benefit others without an ulterior motive. After reading this definition, I posed the question of whether altruism can exist when psychological egoism is present.

'Altruism Cannot Co-exist with Psychological Egoism'

The simple answer is that altruism cannot exist when psychological egoism does. The reason for this can be found in the Implications of Egoism Argument. This argument states that we cannot be altruistic if psychological egoism exists. With that being said, it cannot be our duty to be altruistic. This is because morality does not demand the impossible (Feinberg, 1965). When I first thought about this statement, I truly believed that both altruism and psychological egoism could exist simultaneously. However, the more I read and became informed about these concepts, the more I realized that everything has some sort of benefit to an individual, thereby disproving altruism. Even though you can do something without doing it specifically for personal gain, one is always present. Whether it be through fulfillment or self-satisfaction, a personal gain always exists. This does not mean, however, that that is the main goal of a particular action or deed.

Another thing I found very interesting while reading was one of the two egoistic strategies. Although both did spark an interest, the one that really stood out to me was ‘appealing to a guilty conscience’. A lot of people do the ethical thing not because it is right, rather because they fear what will happen when they do something wrong. For example, many people speak of the terrible guilt they would feel if they did nothing to fight against an unjust act. To be more clear, they fear the guilt they would feel for not acting. Although this may be a subconscious thought during the time of an unjust act, the fact of the matter is that fear is still present and often the reason people act. Appealing to the guilty conscience only further proves that altruism cannot exist when psychological egoism does. In this case, having a clean conscience and avoiding the guilt would be considered the personal gain (Batson, 1991).

Conclusion: The Inescapable Presence of Self-Interest

In conclusion, though often not realized, everything individuals do in life has a personal benefit. This recognition of inherent self-interest does not necessarily negate the value or impact of seemingly altruistic acts. However, to be fair, not every action is done solely with the intention of personal gain. There are some people in this world who believe that they are truly doing selfless acts that cannot benefit them. Despite their intentions, the rewards, whether tangible or intangible, are an inevitable part of human experience. After careful consideration, I do agree that in this world, altruism cannot exist when psychological egoism does. Though not always the goal, every action comes with some sort of reward, however big or small that may be.

References

• Batson, C. D. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Feinberg, J. (1965). Psychological Egoism. In J. Feinberg (Ed.), Reason and Responsibility: Readings in Some Basic Problems of Philosophy (pp. 497-507). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.