In philosophy, egoism is the theory that one’s self is, or should be, the motivation and the goal of

one’s own action. Egoism has two variants, descriptive or normative. The descriptive (or
positive) variant conceives egoism as a factual description of human affairs. That is, people are
motivated by their own interests and desires, and they cannot be described otherwise. The
normative variant proposes that people should be so motivated, regardless of what presently
motivates their behavior. Altruism is the opposite of egoism.
The term “egoism” derives from “ego,” the Latin term for “I” in English. Egoism should be
distinguished from egotism, which means a psychological overvaluation of one’s own
importance, or of one’s own activities.
People act for many reasons; but for whom, or what, do or should they act—for themselves, for
God, or for the good of the planet? Can an individual ever act only according to her own interests
without regard for others’ interests. Conversely, can an individual ever truly act for others in
complete disregard for her own interests? The answers will depend on an account of free will.
Some philosophers argue that an individual has no choice in these matters, claiming that a
person’s acts are determined by prior events which make illusory any belief in choice.

Ego means self; egoism can be thought of as self-ism. Egoism is a theory, in ethics, that human beings
act or should act in their own interests and desires. Egoism is opposed to altruism, which asserts that
human beings should act in ways that help others. Egoism is frequently associated with the early Greek
hedonists, whose aim was pursuing pleasure and avoiding pain

The descriptive egoist’s theory is called “psychological egoism.” Psychological egoism describes human
nature as being wholly self-centered and self-motivated. Examples of this explanation of human nature
predate the formation of the theory, and, are found in writings such as that of British Victorian historian,
Macaulay, and, in that of British Reformation political philosopher, Thomas Hobbes. To the question,
“What proposition is there respecting human nature which is absolutely and universally true?”,
Macaulay, replies, “We know of only one . . . that men always act from self-interest.” (Quoted in Garvin.)
In Leviathan, Hobbes maintains that, “No man giveth but with intention of good to himself; because gift
is voluntary; and of all voluntary acts the object to every man is his own pleasure.” In its strong form,
psychological egoism asserts that people always act in their own interests, and, cannot but act in their
own interests, even though they may disguise their motivation with references to helping others or
doing their duty.

The second variant of egoism is normative in that it stipulates the agent ought to promote the self above
other values. Herbert Spencer said, “Ethics has to recognize the truth, recognized in unethical thought,
that egoism comes before altruism. The acts required for continued self-preservation, including the
enjoyments of benefits achieved by such arts, are the first requisites to universal welfare. Unless each
duly cares for himself, his care for all others is ended in death, and if each thus dies there remain no
others to be cared for.”

Rational egoism claims that the promotion of one’s own interests is always in accordance with reason.
The greatest and most provocative proponent of rational egoism is Ayn Rand, whose The Virtue of
Selfishness outlines the logic and appeal of the theory. Rand argues that: first, properly defined,
selfishness rejects the sacrificial ethics of the West’s Judaic-Christian heritage on the grounds that it is
right for man to live his own life; and, Rand argues that, second, selfishness is a proper virtue to pursue.
That being said, she rejects the “selfless selfishness” of irrationally acting individuals: “the actor must
always be the beneficiary of his action and that man must act for his own rational self-interest.” To be
ethically selfish thus entails a commitment to reason rather than to emotionally driven whims and
instincts.

Altruism, in ethics, a theory of conduct that regards the good of others as the end of moral action. The
term (French altruisme, derived from Latin alter, “other”) was coined in the 19th century by Auguste
Comte, the founder of Positivism, and adopted generally as a convenient antithesis to egoism. As a
theory of conduct, its adequacy depends on an interpretation of “the good.” If the term is taken to
mean pleasure and the absence of pain, most altruists have agreed that a moral agent has an obligation
to further the pleasures and alleviate the pains of other people. The same argument holds if happiness is
taken as the end of life. But critics have asked, if no one has a moral obligation to procure his own
happiness, why should anyone else have an obligation to procure happiness for him? Other conflicts
have arisen between immediate pain and long-range good, especially when the good envisioned by the
doer does not coincide with the vision of the beneficiary.

Altruism refers to behavior that benefits another individual at a cost to oneself. For example, giving your
lunch away is altruistic because it helps someone who is hungry, but at a cost of being hungry yourself.

Evolutionary theories of altruism that focus on long-term benefits such as kin selection or expectations
of later reciprocity cannot account for all altruistic behavior. For example, there are obvious long-term
benefits to giving your lunch to your child, but it is less clear how you will benefit from giving your lunch
to a homeless person you will never see again.

Edward Freeman’s stakeholder theory holds that a company’s stakeholders include just about anyone
affected by the company and its workings. That view is in opposition to the long-held shareholder theory
proposed by economist Milton Friedman that in capitalism, the only stakeholders a company should
care about are its shareholders - and thus, its bottom line. Friedman’s view is that companies are
compelled to make a profit, to satisfy their shareholders, and to continue positive growth.

By contrast, Dr. Freeman suggests that a company’s stakeholders are "those groups without whose
support the organization would cease to exist." These groups would include customers, employees,
suppliers, political action groups, environmental groups, local communities, the media, financial
institutions, governmental groups, and more. This view paints the corporate environment as an
ecosystem of related groups, all of whom need to be considered and satisfied to keep the company
healthy and successful in the longterm.

Dr. Freeman’s books describe how a healthy company never loses sight of everyone involved in its
success. Stakeholder theory says that if it treats its employees badly, a company will eventually fail. If it
forces its projects on communities to detrimental effects, the same would likely happen. “A company
can’t ignore any of its stakeholders and truly succeed,” Dr. Freeman said in an interview. “There might
be short-term profits, but as stakeholders become dissatisfied, and feel let down, the company cannot
survive.”
The stakeholder theory is a theory of organizational management and business ethics that accounts for
multiple constituencies impacted by business entities like employees, suppliers, local communities,
creditors, and others.[1] It addresses morals and values in managing an organization, such as those
related to corporate social responsibility, market economy, and social contract theory.

Contract theory is the study of how people and organizations construct and develop legal agreements. It
analyzes how parties with conflicting interests build formal and informal contracts, even tenancy.
Contract theory draws upon principles of financial and economic behavior as different parties have
different incentives to perform or not perform particular actions. It is also useful for understanding
forward contracts, and other legal contracts and their provisions. It also includes an understanding of
letters of intent and memorandums of understanding.

In an ideal world, contracts should provide a clear and specific understanding of responsibilities and
requirements, eliminating the risk of disputes or misunderstandings occurring later. However, that does
not always happen.

Contract theory covers the implied trust between the different parties and investigates the formation of
contracts in the presence of asymmetric information, which occurs when one party to an economic
transaction possesses greater material knowledge than the other party.

One of the most prominent applications of contract theory is how to design employee benefits
optimally. Contract theory examines a decision maker’s behavior under specific structures. Under these
structures, contract theory aims to input an algorithm that will optimize the individual’s decisions.

Utility theory bases its beliefs upon individuals’ preferences. It is a theory postulated in economics to
explain behavior of individuals based on the premise people can consistently rank order their choices
depending upon their preferences. Each individual will show different preferences, which appear to be
hard-wired within each individual. We can thus state that individuals’ preferences are intrinsic. Any
theory, which proposes to capture preferences, is, by necessity, abstraction based on certain
assumptions. Utility theory is a positive theory that seeks to explain the individuals’ observed behavior
and choices.The distinction between normative and positive aspects of a theory is very important in the
discipline of economics. Some people argue that economic theories should be normative, which means
they should be prescriptive and tell people what to do. Others argue, often successfully, that economic
theories are designed to be explanations of observed behavior of agents in the market, hence positive in
that sense. This contrasts with a normative theory, one that dictates that people should behave in the
manner prescribed by it. Instead, it is only since the theory itself is positive, after observing the choices
that individuals make, we can draw inferences about their preferences. When we place certain
restrictions on those preferences, we can represent them analytically using a utility function—a
mathematical formulation that ranks the preferences of the individual in terms of satisfaction different
consumption bundles provide. Thus, under the assumptions of utility theory, we can assume that people
behaved as if they had a utility function and acted according to it. Therefore, the fact that a person does
not know his/her utility function, or even denies its existence, does not contradict the theory.
Economists have used experiments to decipher individuals’ utility functions and the behavior that
underlies individuals’ utility.
To begin, assume that an individual faces a set of consumption “bundles.” We assume that individuals
have clear preferences that enable them to “rank order” all bundles based on desirability, that is, the
level of satisfaction each bundle shall provide to each individual. This rank ordering based on
preferences tells us the theory itself has ordinal utility—it is designed to study relative satisfaction
levels. As we noted earlier, absolute satisfaction depends upon conditions; thus, the theory by default
cannot have cardinal utility, or utility that can represent the absolute level of satisfaction. To make this
theory concrete, imagine that consumption bundles comprise food and clothing for a week in all
different combinations, that is, food for half a week, clothing for half a week, and all other possible
combinations.
Differences between Capitalism and Communism
Capitalism

 System of government is democratic

 Property is privately owned
 Driven by free enterprise
  Wealth distributed unevenly
 Education and health care provided by private entities
 Freedom of the press Class distinctions: upper class, middle class and working
class
 Focus is on the individual and his/her own progress in life

Communism

 System of government is totalitarian

 Property is owned by the state
 No free enterprise is allowed
 Wealth distributed equally
 Education and health care provided by the state
 Press controlled and owned by the state
 Classless society: all members of society are considered to be equal
 Focus is on the progress of the community as a whole

Following this Capitalism and communism have the following opposing sets of
ideas:
The ideology of capitalism

 People need freedom

 When people compete against one another, they achieve greater things
 Some people have more than others because they make better use of their abilities
 Governments should not interfere with the rights of individuals to make their own
living
 The government should interfere in the economy as little as possible

The ideology of communism

 People need one another

 When people work together as equals, they achieve greater things
 No-one should have more than anyone else - everybody's needs are equally
important
 Governments should make sure that everyone's needs are being met
 There is central control of the economy
The field of ethics, or moral philosophy, investigates theories that can systematically
describe what makes acts right or wrong. Moral philosophy is usually divided into three
categories: metaethics, applied ethics, and normative ethics. Metaethics investigates
where our moral values, language, and principles come from and what they mean; it is
concerned with “what is morality?” rather than “what is moral?” Applied ethics seeks to
apply philosophical tools to examine specific controversial issues and provide practical
solutions to moral problems. Normative ethics investigates the moral standards that
regulate right and wrong conduct. Theories within normative ethics include utilitarianism,
consequentialism, contractualism, virtue ethics, and more.
Value theory is concerned with theoretical questions about value and goodness of all
varieties, questions that often cross the boundaries between normative ethics and the
metaethical. It asks how and why people value something, be it a person, idea, or
object; thus both moral and natural goods are equally relevant to value theory.
Plato
Aristotle

John locke
Adam smith
Karl martx
Thomas

Peter drucker

https://iep.utm.edu/egoism/#:~:text=In%20philosophy%2C%20egoism%20is%20the,goal%20of
%20one's%20own%20action.&text=The%20normative%20variant%20proposes%20that,is%20the
%20opposite%20of%20egoism.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/altruism-ethics
https://www.sahistory.org.za/article/differences-between-capitalism-communism-and-why-did-it-start-
russia

https://researchguides.library.wisc.edu/c.php?g=178198&p=1487671

https://www.apa.org/pubs/highlights/peeps/issue-48