As we have seen in the previous post, both Frankena and Medlin exploit what they perceive to be inconsistencies involved in the universalization of ethical egoism. Jesse Kalin has risen to the defense of the coherence of ethical egoism, but is he successful? It is to this question that we will now turn.

Analysis of Kalin’s Response
Recall that Frankena’s criticism centers on that fact that ethical egoism produces contradictory moral judgments when people’s self-interests collide. This is a result of the two parenetic principles that Frankena stipulates underlie ethical egoism:

(1)

(2)

When the interests of X and Z conflict, “X ought to do y” and “X ought not to do y” both follow when X and Z apply principles (1) and (2) in their capacity as either a first- or third-person moral agent.¹ Kalin agrees that (1) is central to any egoistic position, but he takes issues with (2) and he replaces principle (2) with principle (3) instead:
(Continue Reading…)

1. For example, let’s say Tom could assuredly get away with stealing from Fred. When Tom applies principle (1), we end up with “Tom should steal from Fred.” When Fred (as a third-party in this situation) applies principle (2), we end up with “Tom should not steal from Fred.”↩

Is ethical egoism internally coherent? We should hasten to add that in asking such a question we are not asking whether ethical egoism is good or correct. The latter is a legitimate and important question in its own right, but it is quite distinct from the former, and the answer to that question exceeds the scope of this current examination in any event.

In asking whether ethical egoism is internally coherent, we are interested in learning whether it is able to offer a consistent moral vision, which has a substantial bearing on its viability to function as a norm for moral conduct.¹

Before we can begin to answer the question of whether ethical egoism can (coherently and plausibly) serve as an ultimate moral norm, however, we must first define our terms.
(Continue Reading…)

1. Throughout this post, the terms “ethical” and “moral” are used interchangeably and synonymously with one another.↩