Psychological Ethical Egoism

Psychological Ethical Egoism A Comparative Analysis of Psychological and Ethical Egoism This essay is a comparative analysis of ethical egoism and psychological egoism. In order to clearly set the direction of this paper, I would first render the meaning these two concepts. Afterwards, I would explicate the strengths and weaknesses of psychological egoism and discuss the two versions of ethical egoism. Upon doing so, this paper would present the contrasting points of both theories. Psychological Egoism generally states that people are naturally selfish and would pursue their self-interest at all times. It further claims that even altruistic acts are, at the root of it, grounded on ones pursuit of his/her own welfare (Shaver, 2002). This concept of egoism states the motivation of self-interest as a fact, as such, a person does not choose to be â€Å"egoistic,† or selfish, he/she as a human being simply is. Take for example a mans decision to become a doctor, or to help charity, or even to help an old lady cross the street. Most of the time, the justifications a person gives for choosing to do these acts have altruistic inclinations. However, psychological egoists would contend that the motives of these acts are aimed still, at the individual who desires to perform them. A man who wants to be a doctor may want to help other people, but this can be seen as grounded too on his happiness being fulfilled when he sees that he has helped others. Giving to charit y would allow an individual to experience satisfaction by being generous, it keeps him happy and feeling good about himself or the more trivial reason is he wants to be praised for his actions. On the other hand, ethical egoism does not say that man would inevitably be motivated by his own interests. Rather, this doctrine purports a normative stance that people ought to pursue their welfare. This is to say that when one chooses to act upon, he or she must take into utmost consideration his or her own self-interest. Scholars deem this ethical theory as a deviant to traditional moral theories which gives emphasis on impersonal moral choices and the greater good of the greater number. Psychological egoism founds itself on a scientific discipline that demands for empirical proof and consistency in order to be considered true. However, scholars have criticized psychological egotists for failing to take into proper account that would counter-proof their claim of inherent selfish motivation. Instead, evidence and day-to-day observations would show that that there are acts that can be considered altruistic which the psychological egotists attempt to evade by misconstruing the concept of selfishness juxtapose to self-interest. Further, counter-examples made be seen through that are committed that are contrary to the best self-interest, and actions done without much thought of ones welfare. The lack of verifiability makes the claim of psychological egoism dubitable within the scientific community it initially launches itself from. In line with this, as a supposed empirical viewpoint, it has consequently committed a logical fallacy generally referred to as hasty generaliz ation. It attempts to make a universal claim of individuals but fails to take into consideration the other factors that would negate its conjecture. It impulsively over-simplified the complexity of the human being, relations, and social reality (Davidson, 2006). It has been purported that ethical egoism has two versions, these two divisions are clearly described by Davidson (2006) who wrote: The strong version asserts that it is always moral to endorse your own good and it is never moral not to do so. The weak version says that even though it is always moral to endorse your own good the converse is not necessarily accurate. There could be situations where it may be more important to ignore your own welfare when making a moral judgment. (Davidson, 2006) The strong version as we could ply tends to make a strict and universal maxim out of the pursuit for self-interest and welfare. It creates an assumption that when one follows that which would benefit him or her the most then it would consequently produce moral worth. The weak version tends to make room for exceptional cases wherein the ones self-interest is in a most unique sense of lesser significance to that of which one is morally asked to do. From what I have already laid down, we could already see the divergence of psychological egoism and ethical egoism. The former, psychological egoism is a descriptive in nature. It asserts self-interest and selfishness even, as a fact, embedded in human nature. While Ethical egoism is normative, it prescribes the pursuit of self-interest as something human beings should do. One could also see the themes of determinism and free will in both concepts. This is in the sense that when psychological egoists assert their claim, they implicitly endorse that the behavior and acts of man is determined by self-interest. On the other side, ethical egoists endorses that the motivation of self-interest is a choice, the right and moral way to choose. Consequently, it is quite obvious that there is a difference in the motivations of both theories. Psychological egoism asserts self-interest as an inevitable motive of human nature, while ethical egoism is grounded on the motivation to do what is morally best, which is of course, ones welfare (Davidson, 2006). It is often the case that issues and criticisms that arise with regards to these theories of egoism are due to the ambiguity and equivocation of the concept of self-interest and selfishness. It is important to note that one could pursue self-interest without necessarily being viewed as selfish. Psychological egoism can be criticized for its tendency to interchange the two, although a lot of its contemporaries have gone to correct such error. Ethical egoism allows us the free will to choose whats best and grants our rationality the capacity to determine whether there is excess in our pursuit of our interests. Self-interest is something we follow, calculating our benefits in our actions in order to produce the most advantageous position for ourselves. Selfishness is when, as individuals, we lose consideration of others, to think of ourselves, and our desires alone†¦ for me, a manifestation of unchecked vanity. References Shaver, R. (2002). Egoism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved November 7, 2007 from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egoism/ Davidson, B. (2006). Ethical and Psychological Egoism: An Explanation of theories. Associated Content. Retrieved November 7, 2007 from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/93503/ethical_and_psychological_egoism.html?page=2

Impact of Police Brutality

Police officers are not only trained to uphold ND respect the law but It Is made very clear to them that they are not above or Immune to the law themselves. Although they seem to believe they are. Due to the amount of power and authority given to police officers, they must be held accountable for any criminal actions. Many of you are probably wondering why I chose this topic, and it is simply because it has probably touched every single person in this room, whether you witnessed it, heard about it or were a victim of it yourself but nothing Is being said or done to stop it.I'm not sure how many of you attended Blood West Villages annual Ukrainian Festival last weekend but If you did, there Is no doubt In my mind that you are thinking about the hundreds of armed police officers patrolling the festival as if it was a federal prison. Now I ask you, why would they do this? Why do police officers feel they have the right to treat the average citizen like a criminal?There are many incident s across Canada involving the RACE and Regional Police Forces, in which they are accused of abusing their authority and power, such as unjustified deaths including, but not limited to, the death of Robert Deskills In October 2007 at the Vancouver Airport, the unnecessary arrest and searches of hundreds of Innocent people during the 620 summit. There are countless videos and eyewitness testimonies to these occurrences, yet they go virtually unnoticed. Now I ask you, who is policing the police?A recent incident involving police brutality was the shocking assault caught on camera by officer Geoff Mantled in Keelson, British Columbia. Mantled was accused of assault causing bodily harm, after Instructing a suspect to get down, and as he proceeded to get on his hands and knees, the RACE officer kicked him In the face. As a suspect, you are innocent until proven guilty, therefore if you are complying with police, they have no right to assault you. This officer's actions were intentional, d eliberate and appalling to say the least.Now I ask you, what was the punishment for such a crime? Mantled was suspended from the force with pay. Sounds like more of a vacation to me! Do you think this is an adequate punishment for kicking someone in the face? I most certainly do not! Geoff Mantled should be charged with assault causing bodily harm, Like any other citizen would be. Due to the â€Å"Blue Shield,† which Is better known as he police code of silence, is simply the unwritten rule that all police officers will not to report against another colleague's errors, misconducts or crimes.Police officers rarely go against this code because doing so would cause unrest within the department, and other consequences such as having your own misconduct exposed. Due to this, It is clear that police cannot be trusted to conduct their own internal Investigations Walton tenet department as ten result wall always De Dallas. Canaan needs an independent agency dedicated to investigating allegations of police conducts and excessive force in order to ensure accountability in these specific incidents.An external agency, free of political interference may help to restore some of the trust, confidence and respect of the RACE and regional police forces, which has been undermined by recent incidents of police misconduct. If police forces feel that they can assault people in broad daylight with multiple witnesses and get away with it then we can only imagine the things they think they can get away with when nobody is looking. Now I ask you, who is policing the police? Currently, it is nobody, and something must be done about it!

Different Cultures Between Saudi Arabia and United States

Seeing as that I am a Saudi Arabian descent and living in the United States, I have been exposed to many misunderstandings, stereotypes, and invalid generalizations about my culture. There have been many instances in which I encountered stereotypes, mostly presented to the American public through various media types, which have limited Americans from realizing or seeking to comprehend more about my culture and heritage.As Thomas Sowell points out â€Å"one of the obstacles to understanding what behavioral characteristics follow each group around the world is the widespread use of the term â€Å"stereotypes† to dismiss whatever observations or evidence may be cited as to distinguishing features of particular group behavior patterns. † (Sowell, 11).From my perspective, three beliefs that most 21st Century Americans have in regards to Saudis which are stereotypical are: 1) our women are submissive and have no voice or rights in our society, 2) Saudis are either fanatics or support terrorist activity in the name of religion, and 3) lastly each family in Saudi has its own oil well and therefore no other businesses are required. There are specifically two Saudi laws which Americans have heard about via the media which have formed American opinion about Saudi Arabia’s attitude towards women.The first law enforces that women must cover their hair and body with a black veil and garb. Another Saudi law which has been granted much media attention is that Saudi women are not allowed to drive. These laws are looked upon by Americans as boding poorly for Saudi women. Because this conduct is in such sharp contrast with the United States’ attitude towards women and their more revealing attire, the media has hyped upon how these Saudi laws are examples of how Saudi women are submissive because they have neither stood upon for their rights, such as drive or dress as they desire, nor sought to have a voice in society.What we see instead is a strong fam ilial structure with nepotism occurring in society (Lewis, 68-69) While it is true that such laws have led to women having no public role in their society because they are seemingly â€Å"protected† by their Saudi men, it is unfair to conclude that Saudi women have no rights or voice in society. Saudi women do indeed have rights such as being guaranteed certain shares in inheritance, are allowed to own property, are permitted to choose or refuse potential husbands, and are considered equal to men in the eyes of God (http://www. saudinf.com/main/h61. htm).Furthermore, many Saudi women come to the United States to better educate themselves and return to Saudi to seek employment as nurses, doctors, professionals, and teachers. Upon returning to Saudi they have a hand in better educating or helping the next generation of women seek out their own respective goals. Hence, while it is a valid generalization that Saudi does not promote a public scope or ideology for its women, it doe s instead enable women to better improve upon themselves and expect protection for Saudi men that women might not have in the states.Lastly, a large number of Saudi women have accepted the scope of their responsibilities as a maternal figure in their families and feel that they are submissive to their religion and rearing their children appropriately (http://www. saudinf. com/main/h62. htm). While in the United States, we are seeing that women are being forced to work and provide for their family units without choice, face a higher possibility of divorce, see that rape and sexual harassment statistics have increased, instances of teen pregnancies have rose, and lastly cases of broken homes have increased.From my experience, women’s liberation and freedom is coming at a high cost to society’s families and while the belief that women are submissive and lack a voice in Saudi might be true from some perspectives, it is obvious that in the United States this stereotype migh t actually be occurring due to jealousy perhaps on the part of women who do not have the luxury of selecting if they decide to seek employment or remain at home to raise their children (http://www. wrmea. com/archives/may-june01/0105035. html).Another emphatic belief that Americans seem to have about Saudis is that we are either fanatics, villains, or that we support terrorist activity in the name of religion. Obviously Saudi Arabia which houses the Kaaba, the cube figure which is the most sacred site in Islam, represents our religion and is the direction to which the 5 daily prayers are made. For Americans, the media has publicized how Saudi is the birthplace of fanatic behavior and dramatizes the pilgrimage made to the site as well as how Saudi men dress in the distinct head piece and robe.After September 11th, Americans became overwhelmed with even more media publicity about how the attackers were of Saudi descent and how Saudi wealth has indirectly added in efforts to attack Wes terners, and other such activities. Prior to 9/11, Saudi was simply the land of oil and most Americans could not even find it on the globe! In our modern day world, the news, publications, and movies all instilled within Americans the belief that Saudis were temperamental, geared towards violence, and oil rich businessmen.In fact, comic often portrayed us as villains and school textbooks have been found to associate Islam with violence and intolerance. (http://www. adc. org/index. php? id=283). Due to its rich status, Saudi did not have strong external relationships which could overcome their stereotypes until recently. This belief is not a valid generalization by any means! It is far from the truth as Saudis have sought to limit the ultra conservative factions within their country because besides tarnishing its reputation in the world it also causes commotion and upheaval in Saudi Arabia as well.For Saudi, it is of utmost importance in its abroad relations to keep allies and busine sses purchasing its oil and it can not afford to alienate its friends. As Saudi is the predominate supplier and largest producer of oil to countries abroad, Americans have the misconception that each Saudi family must contain their own personal oil well in their own backyard. This is a laughable belief, but it is not the first time I have experienced Americans believing it to be a valid one. In fact, the country produces an average of 10. 2 million bbl/d of total oil, comprising crude oil, and natural gas liquids.The belief that Saudi has individual oil wells in each individual property is preposterous. In conclusion, I would like to emphasis the significance of acknowledging that Saudi Arabia is seeking to better improve its external relationships with other countries and improve its global image. The leadership in Saudi has sought to control its ultra conservative factions which have impaired its ability to ensure peace and tranquility both within its borders as well as with out. Generally, the media has created an atmosphere of fear and ignorance about other cultures.This psychological manipulation of Americans has lead to further stereotypes which harm cultural diversity and understanding. Many communities have created outreach programs between different cultures in an effort to achieve better communication, understanding, tolerance, and acceptance. These efforts have enabled Americans to began to open the lines of communication and acquire a grasp that our differences are key to learning how to respect other cultures and not fall to misconceptions about other groups of people.

Hahn Surname Meaning and Family History

From the Middle High German han or hane meaning cock or rooster, Hahn was originally a nickname for a proud, cocky individual. Alternate Surname Spellings:  HAHNE, HAHNN, HAHEN, HAHENN, HAAHN, HAAHNN Surname Origin: German, Jewish Where in the World is the HAHN  Surname Found? According to surname distribution data from Forebears, the Hahn surname is found most prevalently in Germany, where it ranks 45th in the nation, followed by South Korea (96th) and Austria (158th). Within Germany, according to WorldNames PublicProfiler, Hahn is most common in Sachsen, Hessen, and Rheinland-Pfalz. Surname  distribution maps at  verwandt.de  show the  Hahn surname is  found in 439 cities and counties throughout Germany, most prevalently in Berlin, Hamburg,  Mà ¼nchen, Esslingen, Hannover, Gießen, Frankfurt am Main,  Kà ¶ln, Rems-Murr-Kreis, and  Nà ¼rnberg. Famous People with the HAHN Surname: Otto Hahn -  Nobel Prize-winning German scientist who discovered nuclear fission and the element protactiniumAugust Hahn - German protestant theologianCarl Wilhelm Hahn - German zoologistPhilipp Matthà ¤us Hahn  - German priest and inventorErwin L. Hahn - U.S. physicist Genealogy Resources for the Surname HAHN: Meanings of Common German SurnamesUncover the meaning of your German last name with this free guide to the meanings and origins of common German surnames. Hahn  Family Crest - Its Not What You ThinkContrary to what you may hear, there is no such thing as a Hahn  family crest or coat of arms for the Hahn surname.  Coats of arms are granted to individuals, not families, and may rightfully be used only by the uninterrupted male-line descendants of the person to whom the coat of arms was originally granted. Hahn Family Genealogy ForumSearch this popular genealogy forum for the Hahn surname to find others who might be researching your ancestors, or post your own Hahn surname query. DistantCousin.com - HAHN Genealogy Family HistoryExplore free databases and genealogy links for the last name Hahn. The Hahn Genealogy and Family Tree PageBrowse genealogy records and links to genealogical and historical records for individuals with the Hahn surname from the website of Genealogy Today. ----------------------- References: Surname Meanings Origins Cottle, Basil.  Penguin Dictionary of Surnames. Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1967. Dorward, David.  Scottish Surnames. Collins Celtic (Pocket edition), 1998. Fucilla, Joseph.  Our Italian Surnames. Genealogical Publishing Company, 2003. Hanks, Patrick and Flavia Hodges.  A Dictionary of Surnames. Oxford University Press, 1989. Hanks, Patrick.  Dictionary of American Family Names. Oxford University Press, 2003. Reaney, P.H.  A Dictionary of English Surnames. Oxford University Press, 1997. Smith, Elsdon C.  American Surnames. Genealogical Publishing Company, 1997.