首页> 外文期刊>Economics & philosophy >PHILOSOPHICAL EGOISM: ITS NATURE AND LIMITATIONS
【24h】

PHILOSOPHICAL EGOISM: ITS NATURE AND LIMITATIONS

机译:哲学利己主义的性质与局限性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Egoism and altruism are unequal contenders in the explanation of human behaviour. While egoism tends to be viewed as natural and unproblematic, altruism has always been treated with suspicion, and it has often been argued that apparent cases of altruistic behaviour might really just be some special form of egoism. The reason for this is that egoism fits into our usual theoretical views of human behaviour in a way that altruism does not. This is true on the biological level, where an evolutionary account seems to favour egoism, as well as on the psychological level, where an account of self-interested motivation is deeply rooted in folk psychology and in the economic model of human behaviour. While altruism has started to receive increasing support in both biological and psychological debates over the last decades, this paper focuses on yet another level, where egoism is still widely taken for granted. Philosophical egoism (Martin Hollis' term) is the view that, on the ultimate level of intentional explanation, all action is motivated by one of the agent's desires. This view is supported by the standard notion that for a complex of behaviour to be an action, there has to be a way to account for that behaviour in terms of the agent's own pro-attitudes. Psychological altruists, it is claimed, are philosophical egoists in that they are motivated by desires that have the other's benefit rather than the agent's own for its ultimate object (other-directed desires). This paper casts doubt on this thesis, arguing that empathetic agents act on other people's pro-attitudes in very much the same way as agents usually act on their own, and that while other-directed desires do play an important role in many cases of psychologically altruistic action, they are not necessary in explanations of some of the most basic and most pervasive types of human altruistic behaviour. The paper rnconcludes with the claim that philosophical egoism is really a cultural value rather than a conceptual feature of action.
机译:在解释人类行为时,利己主义和利他主义是不平等的竞争者。尽管利己主义往往被认为是自然而然的,但利他主义一直受到怀疑,而且经常有人争辩说,利他行为的表象确实可能只是利己主义的一种特殊形式。这样做的原因是,利己主义以利他主义不适合我们人类行为的通常理论观点。从生物学的角度看,进化论似乎偏向于利己主义,从心理学的角度来看,这是正确的。在心理学的层面上,自利动机的探究深深植根于民间心理学和人类行为的经济模型。在过去的几十年中,尽管利他主义已在生物学和心理学辩论中得到越来越多的支持,但本文着重于另一个层面,在这一层面上,利己主义仍被广泛视为理所当然。哲学上的自我主义(马丁·霍利斯(Martin Hollis)一词)认为,在有意解释的最终层面上,所有行动都是由代理人的一种欲望所驱动的。这种观点得到了标准概念的支持,即要使复杂的行为成为一种行为,就必须有一种方法以代理自身的态度来解释该行为。据称,心理利他主义者是哲学上的利己主义者,因为他们的动机是受益于他人的利益,而不是行为者自身对于其最终目标的利益(指向他人的欲望)。本文对这一论点提出了质疑,认为移情者对他人的态度采取的行为与行为者通常自己采取的行为非常相似,而在其他情况下,他人的欲望确实在心理上起着重要作用。利他行为,对于解释人类利他行为的一些最基本和最普遍的类型而言,它们不是必需的。这篇文章的结论是,哲学利己主义实际上是一种文化价值,而不是行为的概念特征。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号