circumstances ethical egoism recommends we avoid harming others
because it is in our self-interest to do so. However, there will inevitably
be some circumstances where there is more to be gained by harming
others than following our general moral obligations. Therefore we cannot
derive universal rules such as the duty not to lie or to avoid harm directly
from ethical egoism.
We have seen that arguments in favour of self-interest such as improving
society and compatibility with common sense morality are problematic.
What about the obvious objection to ethical egoism - that it endorses
what Rachels describes as “wicked actions” (Rachels, 2018, p.85).
These actions are wicked in the sense that they offend common sense
morality but are justified by the egoist because the action is beneficial
to the individual. Rachels provides an example which Machan explores
further (Machan, 1979, p.9). In this story, a doctor took the last $12 from
a destitute woman for work done which he knew did not benefit the
woman at all. Rachels relates the doctor’s actions to egoism as follows:
“(1) If ethical egoism is correct, then the doctor did the right thing.
(2) The doctor did not do the right thing.
(3) Therefore, ethical egoism is not correct.”
Rachels accepts (1) as “obviously true” and from the premises at
(1) and (2) concludes (3), that ethical egoism is not correct. We can
sympathize with Rachels’ view because it appears that these wicked
actions are permitted under ethical egoism - as long as the individual
benefits. Rachels believes “this is a valid complaint” against ethical
egoism (Rachels, 2018, p.85). It seems counterintuitive to follow a moral
code that could allow for actions that would offend most people’s idea of
acceptable behaviour.
However, Machan questions whether Rachels is right to be so pessimistic.
Taking the doctor example, Machan says that it is not necessarily true
that taking the money is the right thing for the enlightened ethical egoist.
For example, in doing so he might be endangering his reputation in the
longer term. Also Machan argues that “regarding the welfare of another
could well be more rewarding than $12 dollars” (Machan, 1979, p.9).
For these reasons it is not obvious that the doctor has done the right
thing under ethical egoism. It seems naive to imagine that individuals
only value financial gain in terms of self-interest. For example, a person
111