I disagree. An active promoter of higher education for women, he founded Cambridge's Newnham College in 1871. 1 ; 8 Five relevant papers are reprinted in Part III of the collection of Sidgwick’s papers edited by Ma ; 13 Second, I articulate what I claim is a hitherto unrecognized, or under-recognized, puzzle in Sidgwick’s moral epistemology. Michel Onfray: Ethical Hedonism: Ethical hedonism is defined as “an introspective attitude to life based on taking pleasure yourself and pleasuring others, without harming yourself or anyone else.” Egoism:Self interest is the foundation of morality . One of the most influential of the Victorian philosophers, Henry Sidgwick (1838–1900) also made important contributions to fields such as economics, political theory, and classics. AccueilNuméros12Dossier SidgwickAutour du livre de David Phillips...Utilitarianism and Egoism in Sidg... 1In his excellent Sidgwickian Ethics, David Phillips argues that Sidgwick’s argument for utilitarianism from the axioms is less successful than Sidgwick believes. Universal Ethical Egoism is stronger because it includes everyone, not just myself. The concepts of ethical egoism were first introduced by Henry Sidgwick in a book published in 1874 entitled The Methods of Ethics. But this seems awfully close to simply asserting what was supposed to be the conclusion of the argument, viz. [9] Henry Sidgwick, "The Aims and Methods of an Ethical Society," in Practical Ethics: A Collection of Addresses and Essays , second edition (Swan Sonnenschein, 1909), 23-51. Average and total utilitarianism, Ethical hedonism, ethical intuitionism, paradox of hedonism: Influences. The Concept of Egoism : Ethical egoism was introduced by the philosopher Henry Sidgwick in his book “The Methods of Ethics”, written in 1874. Egoism and impartialism fail that test: they cannot both be true (Henry Sidgwick, The Methods of Ethics, pp. Ethical egoism was introduced by the philosopher Henry Sidgwick in his book The Methods of Ethics, written in 1874. J. By a method, Sidgwick meant the rational process of arriving at a means of making ethical decisions. The first problem is that an egoist can deny “that there is such a thing as universal goodness” (125). 4 (2010) 491–520 [491] Henry Sidgwick’s Moral Epistemology AntHony SkElton the precise nature of henry sidgwick’s moral epistemology is disputed.1 In A Theory of Justice, John Rawls claims that in The Methods of Ethics Sidgwick employs a coherentist version of reflective equilibrium.2 on this view, Sidgwick’s justifica- 7I do not think that (U) unpacks the concept of “universal goodness.” Phillips argues that it does mainly by citing the first edition version of (U) (121-2). 19(3) I take it that Phillips’s idea in 1. is this: we are creatures such that if I experience a pleasure or pain, it does not follow that anyone else experiences it. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/etudes-benthamiennes/673 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/etudes-benthamiennes.673, Voir la notice dans le catalogue OpenEdition, Plan du site – Contact – Crédits – Flux de syndication, Nous adhérons à OpenEdition Journals – Édité avec Lodel – Accès réservé, Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search, Autour du livre de David Phillips, Sidgwickian Ethics, Bentham et son influence en Amérique latine, Portail de ressources électroniques en sciences humaines et sociales, https://doi.org/10.4000/etudes-benthamiennes.673, Catalogue des 549 revues. On my view, the appeal to the tests succeeds in establishing the axioms—which is why Sidgwick does not note that the argument of III.XIII fails. One of the most influential of the Victorian philosophers, Henry Sidgwick (1838–1900) also made important contributions to fields such as economics, political theory, and classics. One might think that (U) says that “from a point of view from which I give no special weight to myself, I ought to be indifferent between distributions that result in the same amounts of good.” This is not analytic, in part because giving no special weight to myself is consistent with favouring one distribution over another on grounds other than the amount of goodness. He is both the last of the three classical utilitarians (Bentham, Mill, and Sidgwick) and the first in a tradition of British intuitionists stretching into the mid 20th century and including Moore and Ross. The Methods of Ethics Quotes Showing 1-4 of 4. Arthur Sidgwick and Eleanor Mildred Sidgwick, Henry Sidgwick: A Memoir (Macmillan, 1906), 569. Jeremy Bentham, David Hume, John Stuart Mill. Similarly, in “Some Fundamental Ethical Controversies,” where the argument first appears, Sidgwick writes that “the proposition that this distinction is to be taken as fundamental in determining the ultimate end of rational action for an individual cannot be disproved” (FEC 484). A popular expression in society comes from Christianity, specifically from the book of Genesis. Consider a view on which “(a) any person’s happiness is good; i.e., there is a requirement of reason for any agent, ceteris parabis, to promote it; and (b) there is a special requirement of reason for any agent to promote his own happiness three times as much as he promotes the happiness of anyone else” (125). 338-343). 1  Bare parenthetical references are to David Phillips, Sidgwickian Ethics (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011). Some preliminaries: I ignore the hedonist side of utilitarianism, as Sidgwick does in Methods III.xiii. In his excellent Sidgwickian Ethics, David Phillips argues that Sidgwick’s argument for utilitarianism from the axioms is less successful than Sidgwick believes. (U) does not, then, entail that one does take up the point of view of the universe. History of Ethical Egoism Ethical egoism was introduced by the philosopher Henry Sidgwick .He compared egoism to the philosophy of utilitarianism, writing that whereas utilitarianism sought to maximize overall pleasure, egoism focused only on maximizing individual pleasure. Well, if he’s ready to consider that, then why shouldn’t he be ready to consider a … 13 (1879), pp. 17(1) Phillips describes 2. as a normative premiss (130). 3. Spencer’s Ethical System”, in Mind, vol. Nor is it analytic, even on what I take to be Phillips’s reading: if (U) claims that “universal good” is instantiated, Phillips says the egoist disagrees, but presumably not with an analytic truth. 2Phillips takes the argument for utilitarianism to have two premises: 3(U) The good of any one individual is of no more importance, from the point of view (if I may say so) of the Universe, than the good of any other. Sidwick said that pure egoistic hedonism cannot serve that function (p. 83). Inconsidering ‘enlightened self-interest’ as supplying a primafacie tenable principle for the systematisati… Others, such as utilitarians, may disagree. 1. ... Egoism, Intuitionism, Utilitarianism. Retrouvez [Outlines of the History of Ethics] [By: Sidgwick, Henry] [January, 1988] et des millions de livres en stock sur Amazon.fr. The application of the tests for highest certainty in III.XIII, which seemed at least to have established consequentialism, and which elsewhere Sidgwick endorses as the best way of justifying beliefs, seems to have been forgotten (65-76). Individual ethical egoism is the idea everyone ought to serve my interests. Universal ethical egoism is the idea that everyone ought to seek their own self-interest, not just me. Egoism refers to the theory that justifies an action in terms of the happiness it produces in the agent of the act. The more serious, second problem Phillips raises for (U) is that, even if true, and even if one does take up the point of view of the universe (or think “universal good” is instantiated), (U) cannot justify utilitarianism. This text was scanned in from the 1907 (seventh) edition published by Macmillan and Company, London. 10(1) Insofar as the objection is that Sidgwick cannot go directly from the axioms to utilitarianism, Phillips is surely correct. 221. makes this kind of case possible, and our intuition about this case then constitutes an argument for 3. Henry Sidgwick (/ ˈ s ɪ dʒ w ɪ k / ; 31 May 1838 – 28 August 1900) was an English utilitarian philosopher and economist. An act is good only if it benefits me, and morality dies when I die. Rational. He was the Knightbridge Professor of Moral Philosophy at the University of Cambridge from 1883 until his death, and is best known in philosophy for his utilitarian treatise The Methods of Ethics. Sidgwick's Problem Sidgwick's Problem Holley, David 2002-03-01 00:00:00 Henry Sidgwick regarded his failure to reconcile the claims of rational egoism with those of utilitarianism to reveal a “fundamental contradiction” within practical reason. Some may choose wants over needs and suffer, while others may not be able to meet even basic needs, but that does not change the ethics in pursuing what is desired. 1. He also argues that Sidgwick’s argument for egoism is more successful than this argument for utilitarianism. But he thinks the argument does better than the argument for utilitarianism, for two reasons: 2. is “both substantive and self-evident,” and 3., though not egoism, is the significant claim that there are agent-relative reasons (129). Ethical egoism was introduced by the philosopher Henry Sidgwick in his book The Methods of Ethics, written in 1874. Analyzing the intuitionist and utilitarian Ethical egoism is only as beneficial as the moral code of the person implementing this theory. The text is complete, and all the footnotes are included and linked in. Sidgwick defines “‘ultimate good on the whole,’ unqualified by reference to a particular subject” as “what as a rational being I should desire and seek to realize, assuming myself to have an equal concern for all existence” (ME 112).2 Suppose that “ultimate good on the whole, unqualified by reference to a particular subject” is the same as “good generally.” “I ought to aim at good generally” becomes “I ought to aim at what I ought to desire and seek to realize, assuming myself to have an equal concern for all existence.” That is not analytic. 24(4) Phillips reconstructs Sidgwick as giving a deductive argument for egoism. If so, Sidgwick has reason to think the tests are insufficient: they secure the axioms but not utilitarianism. SIDGWICK’S HEDONISM . Reactions to any such interpretation, which supposedlyaccorded a too generous role to “received opinion” inSidgwick’s methodology, came from Singer (1974) and many other… The text is complete, and all the footnotes are included and linked in. 4Phillips thinks (R) is analytic and that Sidgwick “should be happy to admit” this (124). 9I have three comments on this objection. Ethical Egoism also eliminates the concept of altruism. Since some others do, I see how this might be an effective argument for agent-relative reasons. Hedonism. Whether that argument works is another matter (considered by Phillips in his pretty convincing chapter 4). The last comprehensive attempt to restate the principles of a free society, already much qualified and in the restrained form expected of an academic textbook, is Henry Sidgwick, The Elements of Politics (London: Macmillan, 1891). 11(2) The objection in (1) can be made without thinking that (U) is analytic. Phillips might reply that for such goods, there is no case for agent-relative reasons. Ethical egoism was introduced by the philosopher Henry Sidgwick in his book The Methods of Ethics, written in 1874.Sidgwick compared egoism to the philosophy of utilitarianism, writing that whereas utilitarianism sought to maximize overall pleasure, egoism … I have no special connection to the obtaining of that state of affairs—I might not know that it obtains, and no state of me need be a part of it. Sidgwick made. Phillips puts his objection this way: “Sidgwick slips from the (proper, but nonsubstantive) idea that if there is such a thing as universal goodness there is some reason to aim at it, to the (substantive, but not properly supported) idea that it is the only thing that ought to be aimed at or promoted” (125) The real problem, he thinks, is that (U), like (R), is analytic, and so cannot rule out aiming at other things. In ethical egoism, actions which have consequences that will benefit the individual can be considered ethical, even if others hold a different definition of ethics. Filed Under: Definitions and Examples of Theory Tagged With: Definitions and Examples of Theory, © 2020 HealthResearchFunding.org - Privacy Policy, 14 Hysterectomy for Fibroids Pros and Cons, 12 Pros and Cons of the Da Vinci Robotic Surgery, 14 Pros and Cons of the Cataract Surgery Multifocal Lens, 11 Pros and Cons of Monovision Cataract Surgery. Psychological 2. This lets him avoid the objection that the argument deduces a normative conclusion (3.) 6But Phillips does not think Sidgwick’s argument fails because (R) is analytic. What did Henry Sidgwick contribute to moral theory? I disagree. (Funny, I thought that Sidgwick could be written more clearly about his argument here...) Mill argues for "the greatest amount of happiness altogether" as the ultimate "end of human action" and the "standard of morality." But this seems an odd thing to say: surely there is something I ought to desire, assuming myself to have an equal concern for all existence (or, alternatively, surely there is something that is the set of the goods of each individual). Egoism is also called self-love. He also argues that Sidgwick’s argument for egoism is more successful than this argument for utilitarianism. Philosophers before Sidgwick have also retroactively been identified as ethical egoists. Ethical 3. This form of egoism (often called "ethical egoism") is to be distinguished from the empirical hypothesis ("psychological egoism") that human beings seek to … (R) is analytic because for Sidgwick, “to say something is good just is to say there is reason to aim at it” (124). However, the conflict that concerns him arises only in relation to a particular kind of agent. But even if he is right about the first edition, in the later editions Sidgwick seems to unpack not “universal goodness” but rather what it is to take up the point of view of the universe (or at least has this as the antecedent of (U)). 1. Other articles where Methods of Ethics is discussed: ethics: Sidgwick: Sidgwick’s Methods of Ethics (1874) is the most detailed and subtle work of utilitarian ethics yet produced. I close by noting, briefly, a possible solution to an epistemological puzzle in Sidgwick that Phillips raises. Ethical egoism can be divided into three general categories. Sidgwick sets up four criteria for “moral axioms”. In the Methods, after noting 2., he writes that “I do not see how it can be proved that this distinction is not to be taken as fundamental in determining the ultimate end of rational action for an individual” (ME 498). By understanding its concepts, it becomes possible to see how each person implements them in their daily lives. Quotes about Sidgwick . Personal Egoism. mutatis mutandis: A Latin phrase that is still in current use. As Phillips notes, Sidgwick is very concerned to show that his axioms are not tautologies (123). He attended Rugby School and then Trinity College, Cambridge, where he remained his whole career. Yet it would be a moral indulgence to solve hunger in someone else, but creating hunger in oneself. Ethical egoism theory has its proponents and its critics. In ethical egoism, actions which have consequences that will benefit the individual can be considered ethical, even if others hold a different definition of ethics. 219-227, at p. Among the MS. material which Professor Sidgwick intended to be referred to, in preparing this edition for the press, there occurs, as part of the MS. notes for a lecture, a brief history of the development in his thought of the ethical view which he has set forth in the Methods of Ethics. 2. is compelling because if 1. is true, “that fact gives me special reason to want and pursue those goods, and to not want and avoid those bads….My reasons are reasons for me. So he cannot understand the axioms as ruling out reasons to act in non-utilitarian ways. For example, some think that what is good is the state of affairs (whether that is a mental state or not) that satisfies my preference. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy indicates that The Methods of Ethics "in many ways marked the culmination of the classical utilitarian tradition." But I would not have thought that the argument for agent-relative reasons depended on holding any particular view about what is good. Phillips’s thought seems to be that since it is a state of me (and not you), it must give me a special reason. Ethical egoism theory provides a normative position that encourages people from a moral standpoint to do what is in their own best self-interest. However, the conflict that concerns him arises only in relation to a particular kind of agent. Sidgwick compared egoism to the philosophy of utilitarianism, writing that whereas utilitarianism sought to maximize overall pleasure, egoism … The point seems to be that if someone thought that the distinction between one individual and another did matter to choosing between egoism and utilitarianism, it is hard to see how to show that such a person is wrong. A look at Ethical Egoism Introduced in 1874 by Henry Sidgwick in his book The Moral of Ethics, Ethical Egoism is an ethical theory that states that one ought to do what is in their best long term interest. It seems preferable to say instead that the egoist is uninterested in this thing—or, as Sidgwick says, refuses to take up the point of view of the universe. On this view, (U) is true, but what one ought to do is not act as a utilitarian, but rather “promote the weighted sum of her own good and everyone else’s” (125). Retrouvez The Point of View of the Universe: Sidgwick and Contemporary Ethics et des millions de livres en stock sur Amazon.fr. Henry Sidgwick (/ ˈ s ɪ dʒ w ɪ k /; 31 May 1838 – 28 August 1900) was an English utilitarian philosopher and economist. Henry Sidgwick is one of the great intellectual figures of 19th century Britain. This is slightly different than Phillips’s solution to the puzzle, according to which Sidgwick simply saw that the appeal to the tests failed. Table of Contents Prefaces. But the issue is the success of that further argument; Sidgwick is not defeated simply by noting the possibility of a view like (a)-(b). We can recognize an obvious selfish bias in egoism. The concepts of ethical egoism were first introduced by Henry Sidgwick in a book published in 1874 entitled The Methods of Ethics. I. Utilitarianism Phillips … But if so, (U) by itself (or with (R)) does not secure utilitarianism. Sidgwick was one of the most influential ethical philosophers of the Victorian era, and his ideas continue to influence Anglo-American political and ethical theory. Sidgwick believes that Mill's explanation of the "principle of Utility" and the proof he uses is not plain or easy enough to understand. Livraison en Europe à 1 centime seulement ! The contradiction that Sidgwick seems to have in mind is that egoism and impartialism may dictate incompatible actions; at this point he famously considers the legitimacy of postulating a Supreme Being who ensures that they never do – but stops short of endorsing it. Journal of the History of Philosophy, vol. Influenced. I ought to be concerned with the quality of my existence as an individual in a sense, fundamentally important, in which I ought not to be concerned with the quality of the existence of other individuals (127-8). Perhaps no region of Sidgwick’s work has been the subject ofgreater interpretive controversy than his epistemology. The special connection is that I directly experience the things that are good. 4, No. This form of egoism (often called ‘ethical egoism’) is to be distinguished from the empirical hypothesis (‘psychological egoism’) that human beings seek to … Henry Sidgwick conceived of egoism as an ethical theory parallel to utilitarianism: the utilitarian holds that one should maximize the good of all beings in the universe; the egoist holds instead that the good one is ultimately to aim at is only one’s own. Earlier I suggested that there is a gap between the axioms and utilitarianism. Thieves could steal in good conscience. The last comprehensive attempt to restate the principles of a free society, already much qualified and in the restrained form expected of an academic textbook, is Henry Sidgwick, The Elements of Politics (London: Macmillan, 1891). The question is why this gives me a special reason to care about my own pleasure or pain, over and above any reason I have to care about the occurrence of pleasure or pain somewhere. § 1. If you pass through door B, you will not experience this shock, but some other person, a stranger and out of sight, will suffer a shock of the same intensity….Surely you have a reason—a strong reason—to choose door B over door A grounded in the fact that it is that door which will significantly promote your well-being (148-9). How could the fact that something has a special effect on me not affect my reasons?” (129). Husbands or wives could cheat on their spouses because concerns are for the self only. Henry Sidgwick. It is said to be “unprovable,” when many of the greatest utilitarians themselves, such as Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832), John Stuart Mill (1806–1873), and Henry Sidgwick (1838–1900), admitted that no normative ethical theory, including their own, is provable. illusory (Henry Sidgwick, The Methods of Ethics, p. 508). He also thinks Clarke and Kant agree with them (ME 384-6). Some philosophers who brought forward the theory of ethical egoism are Henry Sidgwick, and, Ayn Rand. Henry Sidgwick: The State of the Text. 15Phillips glosses 1. as follows: “I have a special connection to certain goods and bads (e.g., I directly experience certain pains and pleasures)….The key idea is just that of a kind of special connection: that the fact that a certain pleasure or pain is mine means I experience it in a way others do not” (129, 131). 7 quotes from Henry Sidgwick: 'One has to kill a few of one’s natural selves to let the rest grow — a very painful slaughter of innocents. 2 ME = Henry Sidgwick, The Methods of Ethics (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1981); GSM = Lectures on the Ethics of T. H. Green, Mr. H. Spencer, and J. Martineau (London: Macmillan, 1902); : FEC = “Some Fundamental Ethical Controversies,” Mind 14 (1889), 473-87. Quotes about Sidgwick . ― Henry Sidgwick, The Methods of Ethics. Noté /5. mutatis mutandis: A Latin phrase that is still in current use. Previous Paper / Next Paper Table of contents. I close by noting, briefly, a possible solution to an epistemological puzzle in Sidgwick that Phillips raises. “I don’t know. He studied at Trinity College, Cambridge, and taught moral philosophy there from 1869 until 1900. I think Sidgwick intends something weaker. He also argues that Sidgwick’s argument for egoism is more successful than this argument for utilitarianism. Henry Sidgwick. Whether the problem is put in terms of taking up a point of view or instantiating a concept does not affect this admission. 25Phillips notes that in Methods IV.II, the “proof” of utilitarianism proceeds by ad hominem arguments directed at the egoist and the common sense moralist. The early workof Schneewind (1963), Rawls (1971, 1975), and Schultz (1992) played upthe dialectical side of Sidgwick’s approach and the ways inwhich he anticipated the Rawlsian account of the method of reflectiveequilibrium. In this sense, we are distinct individuals, as would not be true if, for example, we were creatures with direct empathetic connections, or there was a sea of pleasures and pains without distinctions between individuals. The Methods of Ethics is a book on ethics first published in 1874 by the English philosopher Henry Sidgwick. The issue is the argument for consequentialism. The cross reference links are not implemented yet, and links to Bentham and Mill texts on the site are not yet implemented. The Methods of Ethics Henry Sidgwick mental: About half the occurrences of this are replacements for ‘psychical’; Sidgwick evidently treats the two words as synonymous. Utilitarianism seeks to contribute to the happiness of all … Phillips’s idea is that the “egoist can admit…that some people have the concept of universal goodness; but the egoist will deny that that concept is ever instantiated” (152n3). This form of ethical egoism promotes personal self-interest without attempting to influence others to do the same. And putting the egoist’s disagreement in terms of denying that there is universal goodness is puzzling. It means ‘(mutatis) with changes made (mutandis) in … Eating potato chips, drinking 5 sodas each day, and having cake for dinner every night might provide short-term pleasure, but ethical egoism would say such actions are not in the person’s self-interest because of the threat those short-term decisions would have on long-term health. Price, Reid, and some… 3. God asks Cain where his brother happens to be. Noté /5. But (U) seems to say only that from the point of view of the universe, I ought to be indifferent between equal amounts of good. Sidgwick’s view that egoism is based on the metaphysical distinction between individual persons is explained, along with his ‘objective’ consequentialism. If the distinction between any one individual and any other is real and fundamental, then I ought to be concerned with the quality of my existence as an individual in a sense, fundamentally important, in which I ought not to be concerned with the quality of the existence of other individuals.Therefore,3. If you do not pass through one or other of them, you will suffer an extremely painful electric shock. First, Sidgwick is considered to have offered the clearest exposition of the classic utilitarianism of Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) to such an extent that he is often counted as a utilitarian himself. I take the axioms presented in III.xiii.3 as canonical. that I have a special reason to care about states of myself. The source of the Text. This … Découvrez et achetez Essays on henry sidgwick. Especially noteworthy is his discussion of the various principles of what he calls common sense morality—i.e., the morality accepted, without systematic thought, by most people. Ethical Egoism is also intimately related to the doctrine of self-realization, which has flourished contemporaneously; it was stressed during Antiquity—especially by Stoics and Neo-Platonists—and has been a recurrent theme since the Renaissance. Sidgwick considers three such procedures, namely, rational egoism, dogmatic intuitionism, and utilitarianism. Livraison en Europe à 1 centime seulement ! 5, 1880, pp. He is both the last of the three classical utilitarians (Bentham, Mill, and Sidgwick) and the first in a tradition of British intuitionists stretching into the mid 20th century and including Moore and Ross. March 18, at Ethical egoism was introduced by the philosopher Henry Sidgwick in his book Tachels Methods of Ethicswritten in Charitable work is not something that Jews necessarily want to do, but they have to do it. 18(2) As it stands, the argument seems to depend on a particular view of the good. Sidgwick compared egoism to the philosophy of utilitarianism, writing that whereas utilitarianism sought to maximize overall pleasure, egoism focused only on maximizing individual pleasure. tags: common-sense, ethics, morality, philosophy. Ethical egoism can be divided into three general categories. Although it might seem to imply otherwise, ethical egoism theory does not require individuals to harm the interests of others when making a moral decision. The egoist, then, does not find the concept confused (like “round square”), but rather uninstantiated (like “unicorn”). It does not promote always doing what one wants to do either. Universal Egoism. from wholly non-normative premises (1.). A murderer could say that it is morally right to kill others because it provides them with satisfaction, especially if there is no fear of imprisonment, being caught, or having a death warrant issued after a conviction. Phillips goes on to endorse Roger Crisp’s “Two Doors 3”: 21You are confronted with two doors. I shall not, however, discuss the complicated relations between this doctrine and Ethical Egoism. The most interesting chapters are two and four. The theory of egoism states that an action is morally right if the decision maker freely decides in order to pursue either their desires or their interests. 5I think that Sidgwick would not be happy to admit that (R) is analytic, nor need he admit this. One of these is that they should not conflict «with any other truth». Robert Shaver, « Utilitarianism and Egoism in Sidgwickian Ethics », Revue d’études benthamiennes [En ligne], 12 | 2013, mis en ligne le 10 décembre 2013, consulté le 04 décembre 2020. This book represents the deepest and most systematic effort to analyze the difficulties of Mill's philosophy and to surmount them to reach a satisfying philosophical version of classic utilitarianism. 14Phillips notes that 3. is weaker than egoism, since special concern for myself is not exclusive concern for myself. Welfare hedonism, as Sidgwick understood is, is a theory about “happiness”(Henry Sidgwick, “Utilitarianism”, now in Essays on Ethics and Method, edited by M. G. Singer, p. 5; see also “Mr. 23I do not share this intuition. But he was many other things besides, writing on religion, economics, politics, education and literature.
2020 henry sidgwick ethical egoism