When Does an Action Become a Moral Issue?
There are two extreme types of moral actions, those that are done to benefit you and those that are done to benefit others. These extremes are known respectively as Egoism and altruism. Since everyone has a different moral code these choices often cause disagreement and conflict to arise between people or groups of people. A personal choice becomes a moral issue at the point that it puts another person’s well being at stake, positively or negatively. Throughout this essay I will look at different examples of choices and determine why they are considered moral issues. I will also attempt to clarify the terms egoism and altruism by proving that there is a middle point between these two extremes.
Let us first look at a case of murder. First off, it is safe to assume that the majority of the earth’s population would agree the murder is an unacceptable action. When looking at murder we can instantly label the choice of killing someone as a moral issue. We can do this because of the fact that it directly affects another person’s wellbeing by ending their life completely. Now, whether the choice to murder is an egoistic or altruistic act depends case by case. Let us say that the murderer decided to kill a man out of pure revenge. This would be a negative egotistical action. The murderer was doing it only to benefit himself and no one else because he wanted justice. In a case of personal revenge, murder does not qualify as an altruistic action. If murder is committed because the murderer believed that the person that he/she killed was a threat to the rest of humanity it might be classified as a different situation. In this case the murderer would be doing it in order to protect everyone around him, even if it put his own life on the line. Philosopher Louis Pojman describes Altruism as an act that “…prescribes that we sacrifice our interests and lives for the good of others.” Although the act of murder is not thought of as a positive moral action, the example of the man killing to help humanity can still be considered an altruistic action. The motive of the murder was to protect all of humanity, a selfless, yet potentially immoral service.
Now that we have a slightly clearer understanding of altruism let us look more into egoism by looking at an example given by Socrates as explained in Plato’s writing “The Ring of Gyges”. In the story a man by the name of Gyges comes across a ring that mysteriously gives him the power to become invisible. With this ring, Gyges moved up in class, from a mere shepherd to the husband of a queen by committing immoral acts, including killing the king, and avoiding the deserved punishments. We can classify Gyges actions that he uses to rise in power as moral issue due to the fact that they affect the wellbeing of all under rule of the King and Queen. Since he forcibly inserts himself into the role of King he gives himself all of the power he needs to do whatever he wishes. He commits these acts out of greed as well as lust, when it came to his seduction of the queen. These actions were all purely egotistical because he did it only for himself and his wellbeing. In his argument in favor of ethical egoism, professor and philosopher James Rachels explained that, “The interests of everyone will best be promoted if each of us adopts the policy of pursuing our own interests exclusively. Therefore, each of us should adopt the policy of pursuing our own interests exclusively.” When examining this argument it seems as if the term egoism is very similar to the Darwinist view, “Survival of the fittest”. By “pursuing our own interests exclusively” we would be making sure that we did everything in our power to survive and prosper in the way that we wish, at any cost and depending on our moral views. In the example of Gyges we can agree that he was using the ring as a tool to prosper and benefit himself and only himself, making his actions egotistical moral issues.
Now let us look at the more positive case of someone giving money to charity. This is a clear example of a moral issue that affects a person’s wellbeing in a positive way. It is the acting of giving to benefit someone else making it appear to be an altruistic action. But is it safe to say that it is purely altruistic? Lets say that the person who gave to charity was not only giving to benefit others but to also benefit himself emotionally. Is this still purely altruistic? Or does it now have a sense of egoism to it? Pojman explains this situation with the example of friendship, in his description of the paradox of egoism. He explains that, “A true friend is one who is not always preoccupied about his own interests but who forgets about himself altogether, at least sometimes, in order to serve, or enhance the other person’s interests.” Here we can see that an action, in this case the action of friendship, can be both egoistic and altruistic. Friendship, just like giving to charity can be motivated by the desire to benefit the wellbeing of yourself as well as others. Here we can agree that the act of giving to charity cannot be placed in either of the polar opposites of egoism or altruism but instead somewhere in the middle, for it can benefit the giver as well as the receiver.
When looking at a decision there is almost always a way to consider them as moral issues. What changes is the intensity of the issue as well as whether it has a negative or positive affect or outcome. As long as someone’s wellbeing is affected in some way an decision becomes a moral issue. Trying to classify the issue as either egoistic or altruistic becomes slightly more difficult because of the fact that there is so much grey area between the two extremes. The person who commits the action only knows the motives of his/her own action; therefore placing the actions into the egoistic or altruistic category becomes difficult and sometimes can only be done with assumption of the motives. It is clear that there can be no right or wrong classification since it is so open ended and there are so many possibilities. Next time you make a choice try to determine where it fits in the spectrum of egoism and altruism. Depending on the action and he motive it may be a bit more difficult than you think. When you come to a conclusion you can see if your action follows your set moral codes, and you can easily reflect on whether or not your choice was moral or immoral according to your standards.
Unlocking Your Mind 