Psychological Egoism and Cultural Relativism - Essay Example

Discussion 6 Psychological egoism is the act of an individual doing something for their own means, for their own self-interest. When someone acts ina psychological egoistic way, they are doing something that only benefits them; they are aware of how they can be rewarded, and of what is in it for them. Though it may seem that someone is acting and doing on the behalf of someone else, for that other persons benefit, it is often the case that the person is acting egoistically. Branching off from egoism is hedonism, which is when a person does something for the purpose of pleasure, or to at least avoid plain. This goes hand-in-hand with egoism, as the person is only doing something to fully benefit themselves without taking others into concern. Some of the objections to psychological egoism include the fact that some people do act in genuine altruistic ways; there are some cases where people do not have the time to decide who is going to benefit from their actions, they just care about following through with those actions; egoism and altruism are capable of connecting with each other, making in nearly impossible to decide if something was done egoistically or altruistically. Not everyone does something solely to benefit themselves; many of them do act on the best interests of others. Psychological egoism states that people act on for themselves. The majority of people are not that selfish and self-centered, many of them will act in ways that positively affect others without thinking of themselves once. The concept of psychological egoism points to humanity being callous and insensitive to the needs of others, that they could never act to benefit someone other than themselves. This assumption is incorrect - there are numerous people willing to do something for others without being benefited themselves. There are many situations that a person can find themselves in that do not allow them time to think about who they are doing something for, least of all themselves. Some people act on impulse, doing what feels right at the time, or doing what needs to be done, only thinking about the benefits and consequences after the matter. This goes against the fact that psychological egoism attempts to prove that people only think of themselves when acting in any such way. However, there are people who simply find that they do not have the time to fully consider the situation - their main concern is seeing the act through to the end. This often happens during emergencies, such as if a person were to run into oncoming traffic to rescue a child. They do not care whether they will benefit or not, or be rewarded or praised for their brave actions, their main concern is the safety of the child. Egoism and altruism, despite their major differences, share a common link: they can both take place during a single situation (Bateson, 1991). In attempts to positively benefit or affect another person, the person doing the act may also feel satisfied and pleased by their own benefits. This takes place more often that people consciously acknowledge. Again, not everyone is selfish and focused only on themselves, yet they also want to get something out of what they do. They act with everyone in mind. There are many debates based on the truth of psychological egoism, as the concept of psychological egoism does not necessarily hold true in regards to human behavior. Humans are not programmed to only think of one person or the other, but to think of all the people, and to pay most of their attention to the situation at hand. Due to the behavior of humans in connection with egoism, the concept has been debunked time and again. Cultural relativism is the concept that peoples beliefs and activities should be done in regards to their own culture. Through cultural relativism, people are able to understand their culture to its greatest extent, as well as showing others outside of their culture the different aspects of their lives and beliefs. When someone acts in a way that benefits and shows their culture in a positive light, those outside of the culture will be able to see the positive attributes; in many cases, this can dampen down any misconceptions that may be shrouding that culture, not allowing others to see them for who they really are, as opposed to how others believe them or expect them to be (Gairdner, 2008). The advantages of cultural relativism are that people are able to see how to fit into any given culture, understanding what is appropriate and what is looked down upon, so that when dealing with someone of that culture, there will not be any slip-ups. Unfortunately, the major disadvantage of cultural relativism is that there is often a denial of a moral absolute, which can prove unsatisfying (Norris, 1996). Many cultures share the same moral beliefs, such as not causing harm to a child or killing a person; cultural relativism takes away possibilities for the culture to be entirely unique. Cultures tend to adapt from each other, and many cultures share the same roots, so the differences are very few and far between. It becomes difficult to care for or to feel pride towards something that is not uniquely their own, but just a copy, whether or not it is the original. Richard Rorty, an American philosopher, believes that traditional ethicists find pragmatism disturbing because pragmatism is a philosophy, while traditional ethicists prefer to work more with things that are solid and concrete - with theories and concepts that are definite (Rorty, 1995). Ethicists work to judge ethical codes within a community, and not on spending time deciphering consequences in regards to truth and meaning, which is what pragmatism involves. Pragmatism requires the thinker to make connections that may or may not exist, while traditional ethicists would rather stick to things that can be proven or disproven in their field of work. References Bateson, D. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Gairdner, W. (2008). The book of absolutes: A critique of relativism and a defense of universals. New York: McGill-Queens University Press. Norris, C. (1996). Reclaiming truth: Contribution to a critique of cultural relativism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Rorty, R. (1995). Rorty and pragmatism: The philosopher responds to his critics. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press. Read More