There are three main arguments supporting ethical egoism as THE correct ethical lens to figure right/wrong: (a) the “better world” argument, (b) the “altruism is demeaning” argument, and (c) the “aid/help will still happen anyway, it’s not so different after all” argument. Describe any one of these arguments in detail. In answering, you must…
– explain at least one concrete example where the approach seems plausible, & why;
– consider 2 counterarguments to the position (1 must be a possible disagreement with the core claim of psychological egoism, which is often taken as a grounding for then developing a normative position of ethical egoism)
– draw on at least ONE concrete case study as you consider the position.
-Then assess the position, giving the strongest case you can: do you agree/disagree with it as a viable ethical lens? Why/why not? How might a hardcore Ethical Egoist argue against you, and how do you answer their concerns? MAKE SURE to give your reasoning, supporting examples/arguments.
It is based upon the Hinnman book, but you can draw your support from anywhere