The Limits of Self-Centered Morality: Philosophical Perspectives

Abstract

Instructor’s Name Prompt 3 A self-centered moral system aims at maximizing self-interests. The assertions and premises of this argumentative prompt are factual, but the conclusion that supports a self-centered moral system is compromising. The moral point of view is above self-interests; it cuts across selfishness, alluding that everyone's interests and ideas matter and should be valued. Self-interest is not ethical and cannot define and ascertain human behavior. It is possible to be self-centered but not moved by self-interests. John Mill believes morality is a social practice and disputes self-determination by reason. His theory of Utilitarianism accesses actions and institutions based on happiness and that everyone’s happiness matters. Mill disputes that self-centered moral systems are honest. He believes that happiness is socially acquired. The premise that Christianity is dishonest and Aquinas disputes masks unselfishness. Aquinas thinks that God was leading human beings toward a moral life. He argues that self-centered ethical systems depart from consensus. He believes in universal egoism rather than individual egoism. Christianity promotes universal ethics, and it is a morality attributed to God. Aquinas thinks that God is the sole provider and that our selfish interests surpass the interests acknowledged by God. The concept of a self-centered moral system is absurd. Individual egoism does not conform to ethics in society. Self-centeredness relates to egoism, where everyone values their own welfare. This moral system promotes immorality since everyone makes choices depending on their thinking and can be very wrong. It is easier to benefit from cooperation with others than focus on self. Prompt 4 The argument, in this case, is sound, and the premises are accurate, but the conclusion is absurd. Aristotle emphasized living in a moral sense. Aristotle disputes the aspect of spending money on luxury and expensive activities. According to Aristotle, money is a form of exchange and representation of value. Money should not be exaggerated, and one should have money that can satisfy their household and sustain a good life. Aristotle also believes that money cannot buy happiness. People are acquiring wealth in dubious ways, and it is not necessary for the greater good but for some intimidation. Aristotle believes that virtue supersedes money. And a virtuous person is happy with or without money. His analogy disputes the premise of living with luxury but sharing basic needs to sustain a good life. No elements in Kant’s sense of morality require money. His analogy disputes the analogy of creating wealth as a source of happiness and living a luxurious life. Kante should have considered the protection of private property as an essential aspect. He asserts that one should not refuse to help the needy, but it should be in cases where their life is in danger or on the streets and with remorse. His assertions generally portray that no one should own more than another and that the rich are doing injustice in the ambiguous creation of wealth. The argument for not spending money on luxuries to save the poor on basic needs is weak. The rich should only spend money when the need for the poor arises or their lives are in danger. People work for their money to sustain a good life and are entitled to spend according to their hard work. Prompt 6 Descartes believes that reason is a native gift given to everyone and true knowledge is not glued in books but entails the application of reason. His philosophy on the firm foundation of beliefs deduces that the mind is a tool of reason, and God induces these beliefs. The basis of books in this context is o present complete scientific knowledge in more superficial portions so that people can understand. An individual’s mind is a...