Rational egoism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rational egoism is the pursuit of one's own, accurately perceived, self-interest. The term may refer either to the philosophical view that it is always in accordance with reason to pursue self-interest (a view closely related to ethical egoism) or to the behavioral postulate that people actually act in accord with their own, accurately perceived, self-interest (a particular version of psychological egoism)
| Part of a series on Objectivism |
|
Philosophy Special topics Related Important figures Important groups |
Contents |
[edit] Rational egoism in the social sciences
Rational egoism is the standard behavioral postulate of neoclassical economics and of rational actor theory in political science. The economic assumption of rational egoism is often referred to in terms of the implied model of the individual, homo economicus, a term that has been used at least since Pareto (1906).
In both fields, the postulate has been criticized and defended on a range of empirical and philosophical grounds. For example, in political science, the assumption of rational egoism gives rise to the paradox of voting - given the low probability of being decisive, relative to the personal benefit from a change in the outcome, voting in elections is not rational unless the number of electors is very small [1].
[edit] Ayn Rand's version
Ayn Rand's philosophy, Objectivism, links its rational values directly to egoism. Her book The Virtue of Selfishness explains in depth the concept of egoism.[2]The version of rational egoism defined by Rand consists of the principle that pursuing personal interest is rational, and not seeking personal interest is irrational.[3] The principle of another version is while seeking personal interest is rational, there may be occasions when not seeking it is not necessarily irrational.[4]
In Rand's view, there is no greater moral goal than achieving happiness. Rational egoism, however, is not an excuse to act on every whim or emotional impulse,[5] because it is irrational to desire what one has not earned. [6] Happiness requires objective principles, like moral integrity and a respect for the rights of others. This exhibits itself in politics, because rational government would be the least restrictive while protecting everyone's right to life, liberty and property, and forbidding the initiation of force by anyone against anyone.[7] Note that Rand included theft and fraud, and, generally, the threat of force as force.
[edit] Criticism
Adaptive egoism is an alternative to rational egoism. It applies the principles of rational egoism with the added belief that not everything is clear-cut. It consists of the philosophy that a common good can be desirable to the individual. For example some believe that replacing rational egoism in politics and economics with adaptive egoism would construct a better social structure.[8] A general reaction to rational egoism is the belief that it allows people to do anything they want to maximize their pleasure. Defenders state that short term pleasure is not happiness, and therefore not the moral goal. Taking into account all aspects of a decision, rational egoists would do what leads to maximum happiness, both short term and long term, without overstepping other's rights. For example, someone who uses drugs achieves maximum pleasure in the moment, but a rational egoist would avoid using drugs knowing it would do harm to him in the long run.
[edit] The Prisoner's Dilemma
The possibility of situations where acting on selfishness can cause a less desirable situation created the belief that not acting on selfishness is not irrational. An example of this situation, known as Prisoner's dilemma, is discussed in Theory of Games and Economic Behavior.[9] In this situation, two suspects in an investigation are taken into custody and split up. Each is offered a plea bargain individually, if they turn state's evidence and betray the other. If they both betray, they each serve 2 years in prison. However, if the other suspect doesn't betray, then the one betraying goes free and the other serves 10 years. If neither betrays, then they will only spend six months in prison. The dilemma can be summarized as thus;
| Prisoner B Stays Silent | Prisoner B Betrays | |
|---|---|---|
| Prisoner A Stays Silent | Both serve six months | Prisoner A serves ten years Prisoner B goes free |
| Prisoner A Betrays | Prisoner A goes free Prisoner B serves ten years |
Both serve two years |
This shows that circumstances may exist in which rational pursuit of self-interest does not lead to a Pareto optimal solution. Egoists debate whether or not this can be applied to the philosophy of rational egoism.[10]
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- ^ D. Mueller, Public Choice II. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1989
- ^ Rand, Ayn. The Virtue of Selfishness, New American Library, 1964.
- ^ Rand, Ayn. Atlas Shrugged, New American Library, 1957.
- ^ Egoism, http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/egoism.htm#SH2a
- ^ What is Objectivism?, http://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-408-FAQ_is_Objectivism.aspx
- ^ Rand, Ayn. The Virtue of Selfishness, New American Library, 1964.
- ^ Rand, Ayn. Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, New American Library, 1967
- ^ Rational Egoism Versus Adaptive Egoism as Fundamental Postulate for a Descriptive Theory of Human Behavior, http://www.springerlink.com/content/j260076947v55404
- ^ Evolutionary Game Theory, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/game-evolutionary
- ^ Egoism, http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/egoism.htm#SH2a
