|
p.39
|
23059
|
Self-interest is not rational, if the self is just a succession of memories and behaviour
|
|
|
|
Full Idea:
Sidgwick said self-interest is not self-evidently rational. Unless we invoke a religious idea of the soul, human personality is no more than a succession of continuities in memory and behaviour. In that case, why should anyone favour their future self?
|
|
|
|
From:
report of Henry Sidgwick (The Methods of Ethics (7th edn) [1874]) by John Gray - Seven Types of Atheism 2
|
|
|
|
A reaction:
This sounds like Locke's account of the self, as psychological continuity. We can say that our continuous self is a fiction, the hero of our own narrative. Personally I think of the self as a sustained set of brains structures which change very little.
|
III.XIII.3
|
p.382
|
4129
|
It is self-evident (from the point of view of the Universe) that no individual has more importance than another
|
|
|
|
Full Idea:
It is a self-evident principle that the good of one individual is of no more importance, from the point of view of the Universe, than the good of any other, ..and as a rational being I am bound to aim at good generally, not merely at a particular part.
|
|
|
|
From:
Henry Sidgwick (The Methods of Ethics (7th edn) [1874], III.XIII.3)
|
|
|
|
A reaction:
Showing that even a very empirical theory like utilitarianism has an a priori basis. Of course, the principle is false. What about animals, the senile, criminals, androids? What bestows 'importance'?
|