Secular Ethics: 'Ethical' Egoism

[neko2808]

Remix the sound please, so we can hear you.

[tumbleweedjoe]

Great video. It's amazing to me that a person could be interested enough in morality enough to feel the need to develop a moral theory, while at the same time, so deluded as to the nature of morality to mistake egoism for morality. Really it's almost the opposite of morality.

[SenariXarn]

Actually--and this is why psychological egoism is one of those things that, by its very definition, cannot be refuted--the process of adhering to a moral guideline of any sort presents the conflict of desires within an individual. Either the desire to go against morality and pursue their original action or their desire to adhere to the guideline supersedes that of the original desire.

Regardless, it is still the person's desire that guides their choice, their exertion of free will.

[smellarm]

An very impressive video.

But I still do not see a way in which people do not fundamentally behave in their own interests at all times.

You imply that objective moral truths can be derived from the bible / divine revelation but how can these truth claims be anything other than your opinion?

What demonstrably objective standard do you use?

For example, how do you know that that holocaust was "objectively wrong"?

Any answer is necessarily your opinion unless you can show the standard.

[cherylwens]

"Ethical egoism violates the law of non-contradiction on a myriad of fronts."

Not so for me. My self-interest is unwavering. It's only contradicting if we determine that there is an objective "law of non-contradiction". That's not the case in reality, however.

[coachtaskmaster]

"It's only contradicting if we determine that there is an objective "law of non-contradiction". That's not the case in reality, however."

Whaaat?!? I certainly hope you're being sarcastic here? No objective law of non-contradiction in reality? Surely you jest? Though, this would explain why you would make a statement like, "I have no interest in submitting to the philosophical consistency that you seek." IOW, your life is systemically contradictory.

[cherylwens]

Morality is a tool that helps us thrive in society, just as logic and philosophy help us make sense of the world we live in. That however, does not make them the laws of nature. There is no logic behind earthquakes and tsunamis. Therefore, it will be pragmatic for me to dictate that my liberty shall not be violated while that of others can be. I have no interest in submitting to the philosophical consistency that you seek. To put it succinctly, the ends justify the means.

[cherylwens]

"C. The assumption with which we started (1) cannot be true."

A contrived, erroneous conclusion sprung out of an irrational attachment towards a biological/evolutionary propensity i.e altruism.

[cherylwens]

"5. It is wrong to prevent someone from doing his duty."

Why is that self-evidently wrong? Is it wrong to prevent a murderer from murdering? If you can resolve this fallacy, you might be able to understand the veracity of the argument for ethical egoism.

[coachtaskmaster]

So,... your solidarity and liberty must not be violated, but it is ok to do the same to another? If you cannot see how this is philosophically untennable, your counter argument is meaningless. Ethical egoism violates the law of non-contradiction on a myriad of fronts.

[cherylwens]

I function on pragmatism and relativism, not deontological constructs of human beings. If it serves my interest to violate the liberty of others, why not? Now, you might be offended by my views, but that's because you evolved to be moral. Unfortunately, some humans unknowingly allow their secondary goals to subvert their primary goals. Think of the suicide bombers. Or the use of condoms. All a result of human beings becoming too attached to the tools that help them achieve objectives.

[cherylwens]

Immorality hurts the self-interest by bringing about one's banishment from society. Immorality also has a negative effect on our personal well-being because we evolved to be altruistic. Therefore, killing a baby when no one's watching, for example, can actually muster negative feelings like guilt, shame and pain (perceived through our natural mirroring mechanisms) in the murderer.

[QuisSeperabit60]

Excellent. Subscribed.

[LordWhorfinX]

atheism = tragic fail

[freshmuzic]

Great vid.

[migkillertwo]

can you unpack your argument at 8:50 ?

[Theologica37]

As you can see I didn't have a whole lot of time or else I would have presented it. Its not my argument-- and I would only support if we added some qualifiers (noted in video). The argument is easily solved if one posits any form of relativism-- but this is inconsistent with what the Egoist would want to think his position is.

Oh and *** the second character in P3 should be O

[Theologica37]

Sure;

1. One's sole duty is to do one's interest. (EO)

2. It is in O's best interest to murder M.

3. It is in M's best interest to prevent O from murdering him.

4. Therefore, O's duty is to murder M, and M's to prevent it.

5. It is wrong to prevent someone from doing his duty.

6. Therefore, it is wrong for M to prevent O from the murder.

7. Therefore, it is both wrong and not wrong for M to prevent O from murdering him. (contradictory)

C. The assumption with which we started (1) cannot be true.

[migkillertwo]

So basically, because self-interests can conflict with eachother, morality must be relative if egoism is true?

[Theologica37]

Relativism is the escape hatch from that scenario; yes. I don't think Baier is saying that egoism necessitates relativism so much as he is that its false. But supposing that it does lead to relativism (it seems it must); presenting any of the problems with relative systems would bring down the cards.

[Chrisvonbiskirk]

@Theologica37you acted as if you have disproved pyschological egoism claims,throught saying some may feel a need to hold up to a promise,they feel a obligation and don't want to do it but do it to hold up to the promise.which is no more justified that the pychological egoist claims.How do you know this is so?how do you know that its not your desire which is motivating you towards doing so?

How do you know its not just your feeling of empathy or other feelings motivating you to act this way?

[witt19800]

@Theologica37 How does statement 5 necessarily follow from statement 4?

[StutteringDave]

Great video. I seriously hope that Dhorpatan tries to make some kind of response to this.

[migkillertwo]

not a chance

[Theologica37]

It was not directed at anyone in particular.. I do not expect a response from that user or any others who believe that moral values, or for that matter any fact, can come from a contingent world alone. Such a thing is nothing short of a logical impossibility-- seeing as how ''objectiv'ists' have apparently convinced themselves that matter, energy is "existence" .. and of course, let us remember "only existence exists".

..Obviously this sort of reasoning does not even deserve comment.

[TheIrrationalAtheist]

@ Davey

^^^^^

Con strenuous actions you have displayed prove to rationally show the Christian God does not exist. You're merely living in fanatical exponentially ginormous world. God does not exist due to the law of identity, come on Davey, please live according to reality.

[muertos06]

@ Russ

^^^^^^

Might I suggest Objectivism or Secular Humanism~!

I recall hearing from various media that Ayn Rand is right!

[Ishta5]

the only situation where murdering someone is in you best interest is if the possible outcomes are better than not murdering. If you murder because you want to be the leader, then you do lack the skill of simulating. There are a plethora of outcomes that will make it worse for you, it is not the best move. But if someone is trying to kill you, then murder is in your self interest and might be the best move. besides that we also have hardwired desires and repulsions.

[Ishta5]

it's not your self interest but you genes self interest, that means to ensure that they survive the best move is to not do anything that will reduce their chances. lying, stealing, murdering will destabilize the support structure

[Theologica37]

Thanks guys

[ProudToBLoud]

theo is one of the brightest posters on youtube. 5 stars.

[jrsbarker]

Excellent as always Theo

[muertos06]

Thank you Theo. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Atlas Shrugged? No.

Rather, shrugging off Ayn Rand.

and lmafo at 3:28!

[BlackCappa]

Neat presentation.

[Epydemic2020]

informative video