There are a number of situations that any individual faces in life and it is a given in this life that the situations one face must be dealt with by making some decisions. These decisions could be based on an individual’s own judgment or a list of values and customs embedded into the cultural background of the individual. The normative theory, one of the many theories of the ethical paradigm, states that there is a need to consider a hypothesis which would allow the individual to understand the right and the wrong solution to a problem.
This theory allows the individual to balance the good impact with the evil one in a manner that would allow the individual to make a certain decision. Looking at the criteria of finalizing a decision, there is a need to understand the need to follow a certain theory, such as the one I have chosen as ethical egoism. “Ethical egoism is an ethical theory, not a pattern of action or trait of character, and is compatible with being self-effacing and unselfish in practice. ” (Frankena, 1973 )
The ethical egoist need not be an egoist at heart; however he is selfish only for his benefit. This means that when it comes to making a decision about a solution to a problem, the individual would consider the benefits that he would receive from the decision and the impact received in the long run. Ethical egoists tend to look for the benefit that they may receive from a situation and would be certain in reaching a decision that would allow them to balance the good impact higher than the evil one.
The ethical egoist looks for solving a problem in the best manner possible, of course with the intention of evaluating the situation from a perspective where the highest benefit would be received. There are a number of times in life when an individual would be asked as a third party to reach a solution between the other two involved parties. This would allow the individual to consider all the angles of the problem and then make an ethical and dependable solution. However, the solution should be at the advantage of both the parties.
Such a situation occurs when two parties enter into a legal argument and are asked to go through arbitration. Such an activity allows the parties to elect a neutral third party who would be competent enough to solve the problem and hence, reach a decision that would impact both the parties positively. But in the case of an ethical egoist, there would be certain other considerations in the context of arbitration. It is said that when an ethical egoist is asked to solve a problem for another, he tends to implement a solution that it would not prioritize the benefit of the two parties as much as the priority of personal benefit would be.
“Ethical egoists may hold any kind of theory of what is good and what is bad, or of what the welfare of the individual consists in. ” (Frankena, 1973 ) Ethical egoism is not meant to be a theory in realization as it cannot be generalized for every individual in the world. In fact it is only a characteristic or a quality that a specific individual would entail and this individual would look at the right and wrong of a situation for himself.
The reason why ethical egoism was chosen as my theory for has become of much importance is because of the fact that there is always a touch of egoism in a human being’s nature and this means that at any point in life, there is a probability that the individual may work towards ethical egoism in order to get the benefits on his side. This means that ethical egoism may not require a certain set of personality traits but would rather work on anyone who thinks in an egoistic manner.