Review Question:

Explain the legend of Gyges. What questions about morality are raised from the story?

The Legend of Gyges is all about a story which a shepherd found the magical ring which make a man or a human being invincible,  in connection with the story in the morality whether a distinctive human being would be ethical if they did not have to fright the penalty of their actions.  

Distinguish between psychological and ethical egoism. 

Psychological egoism means that this is the act of human being based on their idea and in their own self awareness. This is considered as a specific form of psychological hedonism. While Ethical egoism holds that moral mediator have a responsibility to help and serve others people.

Rachels discusses two arguments for psychological egoism> what are these arguments, and how does he reply to them? 

The Two arguments that James Rachels discuss is “the agent is merely doing what he most wants to do”.  And the other is the act of people that is base on their own need and interest. People have their own belief their self righteousness and to help the other these are the action that implement by a human being with or without a moral dignity. Some people do bad things because they want it to do and they think that is the right act of doing that brings happiness to them.

What three commonplace confusions does Rachels detect in the thesis of psychological egoism? 

The three commonplace confusions does Rachel detect is the misunderstanding of self-centeredness with self importance. Second is that apprehension for single own benefit is unable to get along with any genuine concern for the benefit of others. And the last one is the every act is complete either from self concern or from be of assistance of the other concerning intention.

State the argument for saying that ethical egoism is inconsistent. Why does Rachels accept the argument?

The argument is: “To say that any action or policy of action is right (or that it ought to be adopted) entails that it is right for anyone in the same sort of circumstances.” This argument is unnecessary according to rachels because not all action or policy of action is right maybe it will produce unwarranted things.

According to Rachels, why shouldn’t we hurt others, and why we should help others? How can egoist reply? 

The value of helping other and hurt other is the value of human being is for their own interest and sake, it is something important to do for their own interest not meaning they help other is helping other people it is something that part of the community that is majority and our culture.