Editing Egoism

{{Short description|Philosophy concerning self-regarding motivations or behaviour}}
{{About-distinguish|the philosophy of self-regarding motivations or behaviour|Egotism|Egocentrism}}
{{Redirect|Egoist}}
{{For|the music band|Egoism (band)}}
{{Use British English|date=August 2020}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=August 2020}}
{{Individualism sidebar|expanded=philosophies}}
<!--{{mergefrom|Selfism|date=December 2022}}-->
'''Egoism''' is a [[philosophy]] concerned with the role of the [[self]], or {{linktext|ego}}, as the motivation and goal of one's own action. Different theories of egoism encompass a range of disparate ideas and can generally be categorized into [[positive statement|descriptive]] or [[normative]] forms.<ref name=":1">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Egoism |encyclopedia=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |url=https://iep.utm.edu/egoism/ |first=Alexander |last=Moseley}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Egoism |encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egoism/ |first=Robert |last=Shaver |year=2021 |editor=Edward N. Zalta}}</ref> That is, they may be interested in either describing that people ''do'' act in [[self-interest]] or prescribing that they ''should''. Other definitions of egoism may instead emphasise action according to one's [[will (philosophy)|will]] rather than one's self-interest, and furthermore posit that this is a truer sense of egoism.<ref name=":16">{{cite journal|title=The Case against Rational Egoism in Dostoevsky's ''Notes from Underground''|first=James P.|last=Scanlan|year=1999|journal=Journal of the History of Ideas|volume=60|number=3|pages=549–567|publisher=University of Pennsylvania Press|doi=10.2307/3654018 |jstor=3654018}}</ref>

The ''[[New Catholic Encyclopedia]]'' states of egoism that it "incorporates in itself certain basic truths: it is natural for man to love himself; he should moreover do so, since each one is ultimately responsible for himself; pleasure, the development of one's potentialities, and the acquisition of power are normally desirable."<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Egoism |first=G. J. |last=Dalcourt |encyclopedia=New Catholic Encyclopedia |via=[[Encyclopedia.com]] |access-date=August 11, 2020 |url=https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/egoism}}</ref> The '''moral censure of self-interest''' is a common subject of [[critique]] in egoist philosophy, with such judgments being examined as means of control and the result of power relations. Egoism may also reject the idea that insight into one's internal motivation can arrive extrinsically, such as from [[psychology]] or [[sociology]],<ref name=":1" /> though, for example, this is not present in the [[philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche]].

== Overview ==

The term egoism is derived from the [[French language|French]] {{wikt-lang|fr|égoïsme}}, from the [[Latin]] {{wikt-lang|la|ego}} (first person singular personal pronoun; "I") with the French {{wikt-lang|fr|-ïsme}} ("[[-ism]]").

=== Descriptive theories ===
The descriptive variants of egoism are concerned with self-regard as a factual description of human motivation and, in its furthest application, that all human motivation stems from the desires and interest of the ego.<ref name=":1"/><ref name=":2" /> In these theories, action which is self-regarding may be simply termed ''egoistic''.<ref>{{cite dictionary |title=egoistic |dictionary=American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language |edition=5th |year=2011 |access-date=August 18, 2020 |via=[[Dictionary.com]] |url=https://www.thefreedictionary.com/egoistic}}</ref>

The position that people ''tend'' to act in their own self-interest is called default egoism,<ref name=":15">{{cite web |title=Portraits of Egoism in Classic Cinema III: Nietzschean Portrayals |first=Gary |last=Jason |year=2015 |url=https://www.academia.edu/24443366}}</ref> whereas [[psychological egoism]] is the position that ''all'' motivations are rooted in an ultimately self-serving [[psyche (psychology)|psyche]]. That is, in its strong form, that even seemingly [[altruist]]ic actions are only disguised as such and are always self-serving. Its weaker form instead holds that, even if altruistic motivation is possible, the willed action necessarily becomes egoistic in serving one's own [[will (philosophy)|will]].<ref name=":2" /> In contrast to this and philosophical egoism, biological egoism (also called evolutionary egoism) describes motivations rooted solely in reproductive self-interest (i.e. [[reproductive fitness]]).<ref>{{cite journal |title=Philosophical Egoism: Its Nature and Limitations |first=Hans Bernhard |last=Schmid |journal=[[Economics and Philosophy]] |year=2010 |volume=26 |issue=2 |pages=217–240 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |doi=10.1017/S0266267110000209 |s2cid=145330319 |url=http://doc.rero.ch/record/291075/files/S0266267110000209.pdf}}</ref><ref name=":8">{{cite journal |title=Ontogeny and Social Dominance: A Developmental View of Human Power Patterns |first=Patricia H. |last=Hawley |s2cid=6641843 |journal=[[Evolutionary Psychology (journal)|Evolutionary Psychology]] |year=2014 |volume=12 |issue=2 |pages=318–42 |doi=10.1177/147470491401200204 |pmid=25299882|hdl=2346/93761 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Furthermore, [[selfish gene theory]] holds that it is the self-interest of [[Nucleic acid sequence|genetic information]] that conditions human behaviour.<ref name=":14" />

=== Normative theories ===
Theories which hold egoism to be normative stipulate that the ego ought to promote its own interests above other values. Where this ought is held to be a pragmatic judgment it is termed [[rational egoism]] and where it is held to be a moral judgment it is termed [[ethical egoism]].<ref name=":1" /> The ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'' states that "ethical egoism might also apply to things other than acts, such as rules or character traits" but that such variants are uncommon.<ref name=":2" /> Furthermore, conditional egoism is a [[consequentialist]] form of ethical egoism which holds that egoism is morally right if it leads to morally acceptable ends.<ref name=":1" /> John F. Welsh, in his work ''Max Stirner's Dialectical Egoism: A New Interpretation'', coins the term [[dialectical egoism]] to describe an interpretation of the egoist [[philosophy of Max Stirner]] as being fundamentally [[dialectic]]al.<ref name=":13">{{cite book |title=Max Stirner's Dialectical Egoism: a New Interpretation |first=John F. |last=Welsh |year=2010 |publisher=[[Lexington Books]]}}</ref>{{npsn|date=August 2020}}

Normative egoism, as in the case of Stirner, need not reject that some modes of behavior are to be valued above others—such as Stirner's affirmation that non-restriction and autonomy are to be most highly valued.<ref name=":10">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Max Stirner |encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |first=David |last=Leopold |year=2019 |editor-first=Edward N. |editor-last=Zalta |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/max-stirner/ |publisher=[[Stanford University]]}}</ref> Contrary theories, however, may just as easily favour egoistic domination of others.<ref name=":7" />

== Theoreticians ==
=== Stirner ===
{{Excerpt|Max Stirner|Egoism}}

=== Nietzsche ===
{{quote frame|I submit that egoism belongs to the essence of a noble soul, I mean the unalterable belief that to a being such as "we," other beings must naturally be in subjection, and have to sacrifice themselves. The noble soul accepts the fact of his egoism without question, and also without consciousness of harshness, constraint, or arbitrariness therein, but rather as something that may have its basis in the primary law of things:—if he sought a designation for it he would say: "It is justice itself."|author=[[Friedrich Nietzsche]]|source=''[[Beyond Good and Evil]]''}}

The philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche has been linked to forms of both descriptive and normative egoism.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Friedrich Nietzsche (1844—1900) |encyclopedia=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |first=Dale |last=Wilkerson |url=https://iep.utm.edu/nietzsch/}}</ref> Nietzsche, in attacking the widely held moral abhorrence for egoistic action, seeks to free higher human beings from their belief that this morality is good for them. He rejects [[Christian ethics|Christian]] and [[Kantian ethics]] as merely the disguised egoism of [[slave morality]].<ref name=":15" /><ref name=":3" />

{{quote frame|The word "good" is from the start ''in no way'' necessarily tied up with "unegoistic" actions, as it is in the superstition of those genealogists of morality. Rather, that occurs for the first time with the ''collapse'' of aristocratic value judgments, when this entire contrast between "egoistic" and "unegoistic" pressed itself ever more strongly into human awareness—it is, to use my own words, the ''instinct of the herd'' which, through this contrast, finally gets its word (and its ''words'').<ref>{{cite book |title=On the Genealogy of Morals |first=Friedrich |last=Nietzsche |author-link=Friedrich Nietzsche}}</ref>|author=[[Friedrich Nietzsche]]|source=''[[On the Genealogy of Morals]]''}}

In his ''[[On the Genealogy of Morals]]'', Friedrich Nietzsche traces the origins of [[master–slave morality]] to fundamentally egoistic [[value judgment]]s. In the aristocratic valuation, excellence and virtue come as a form of superiority over the common masses, which the priestly valuation, in ''[[ressentiment]]'' of power, seeks to invert—where the powerless and pitiable become the moral ideal. This upholding of unegoistic actions is therefore seen as stemming from a desire to reject the superiority or excellency of others. He holds that all normative systems which operate in the role often associated with [[morality]] favor the interests of some people, often, though not necessarily, at the expense of others.<ref name=":3">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Nietzsche's Moral and Political Philosophy |encyclopedia=Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |first=Leiter |last=Brian |year=2021 |editor-first=Edward N. |editor-last=Zalta |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche-moral-political/ |publisher=[[Stanford University]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Friedrich Nietzsche |encyclopedia=Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |first=R. Lanier |last=Anderson |year=2021 |editor-first=Edward N. |editor-last=Zalta |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche/ |publisher=[[Stanford University]]}}</ref>

Nevertheless, Nietzsche also states ''in the same book'' that there is no 'doer' of any acts, be they selfish or not:
{{quote frame|...there is no "being" behind doing, effecting, becoming; "the doer" is merely a fiction added to the deed—the deed is everything.(§13)|author=[[Friedrich Nietzsche]]|source=''On the Genealogy of Morals''}}

Jonas Monte of [[Brigham Young University]] argues that Nietzsche doubted if any 'I' existed in the first place, which the former defined as "a conscious Ego who commands mental states".<ref name="thinkingisoccurring">{{Cite web |url=http://aporia.byu.edu/pdfs/monte-Sum_ergo_cogito.pdf |title=Sum, Ergo Cogito: Nietzsche Re-orders Decartes |last=Monte |first=Jonas |date=2015 |website=aporia.byu.edu |publisher=[[Brigham Young University]] |access-date=17 September 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220602112713/https://aporia.byu.edu/pdfs/monte-Sum_ergo_cogito.pdf
|archive-date=2 June 2022}}</ref>
{{related|[[Cogito, ergo sum#Use of "I"]]}}

=== Other theoreticians ===
* [[Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevskii]],<ref name=":12" /> a Russian literary critic and philosopher of nihilism and rational egoism
* [[Aleister Crowley]],<ref>{{cite journal |title=Aleister Crowley on Drugs |first=Christopher Hugh |last=Partridge |year=2017 |publisher=Equinox Publishing Ltd. |journal=International Journal for the Study of New Religions |volume=7 |number=2 |pages=125–151 |issn=2041-9511 |doi=10.1558/ijsnr.v7i2.31941 |url=https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/84818/1/Crowley_on_Drugs.pdf}}</ref> who popularized the expression "[[Do what thou wilt]]"
* [[Arthur Desmond]] as Ragnar Redbeard (possibly, unproved)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Arthur Desmond in Explanation {{!}} Ragnar Redbeard |url=https://www.ragnarredbeard.com/arthur-desmond-in-explanation |access-date=2022-09-13 |website=www.ragnarredbeard.com |language=en}}</ref>
* [[Thomas Hobbes]],<ref name=":9">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Psychological Egoism |encyclopedia=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |first=Joshua |last=May |url=https://iep.utm.edu/psychego/}}</ref> who is attributed as an early proponent of psychological egoism
* [[John Henry Mackay]], a British-German egoist anarchist
* [[Bernard de Mandeville]],<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Bernard Mandeville (1670—1733) |encyclopedia=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |first1=Phyllis |last1=Vandenberg |first2=Abigail |last2=DeHart |url=https://iep.utm.edu/mandevil/}}</ref> whose materialism has been retroactively described as form of egoism
* [[Friedrich Nietzsche]],<ref name="Hicks">{{cite journal |last=Hicks |first=Stephen R. C. |author-link=Stephen Hicks |year=2009 |title=Egoism in Nietzsche and Rand |journal=The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies |publisher=[[Penn State University Press]] |volume=10 |issue=2 |pages=249–291 |doi=10.5325/jaynrandstud.10.2.0249 |jstor=41560389 |s2cid=30410740}}</ref> whose concept of [[will to power]] has both descriptive and prescriptive interpretations<ref name=":3" />
* [[Dmitry Ivanovich Pisarev]],<ref name=":11" /> a Russian literary critic and philosopher of nihilism and rational egoism
* [[Ayn Rand]],<ref name="Hicks"/> who supported an egoistic model of [[capitalist]] self-incentive and [[selfishness]]<ref name=":6" />
* [[Max Stirner]], whose views were described by John F. Welsh as "[[dialectical egoism]]"<ref>{{Cite web |title=Max Stirner's Dialectical Egoism: A New Interpretation : John F. Welsh : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming |url=https://archive.org/details/JohnF.WelshMaxStirnersDialecticalEgoismANewInterpretation |access-date=2020-07-18 |website=[[Internet Archive]] |language=en}}</ref>
* [[Benjamin Tucker]], an American egoist anarchist
* [[James L. Walker]], who independently formulated an egoist philosophy before himself discovering the work of Stirner<ref>{{cite book |last=McElroy |first=Wendy |title=The Debates of Liberty |publisher=[[Lexington Books]] |year=2003 |pages=54–55}}</ref>

== Relation to altruism ==
In 1851, French philosopher [[Auguste Comte]] coined the term [[altruism]] ({{langx|fr|[[wikt:altruisme|altruisme]]}}; {{etymology|it|altrui}}, {{etymology|la|alteri|others}}) as an [[antonym]] for egoism.<ref name=":4">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Altruism |encyclopedia=The Catholic Encyclopedia |first=Timothy |last=Brosnahan |year=1907 |via=New Advent |access-date=August 19, 2020 |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01369a.htm }}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Altriusm (ethics) |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/altruism-ethics}}</ref> In this sense, altruism defined Comte's position that all self-regard must be replaced with only the regard for others.<ref name=":4" />

While [[Friedrich Nietzsche]] does not view altruism as a suitable antonym for egoism,<ref>Nietzsche, Friedrich. KSA. 9:11[7]</ref> Comte instead states that only two human motivations exist, egoistic and altruistic, and that the two cannot be mediated; that is, one must always predominate the other. For Comte, the total subordination of the self to altruism is a necessary condition to both social and personal benefit.<ref name=":4" /> Nietzsche, rather than rejecting the practice of altruism, warns that despite there being neither much altruism nor equality in the world, there is almost universal endorsement of their value and, notoriously, even by those who are its worst enemies in practice.<ref name=":3" /> Egoist philosophy commonly views the subordination of the self to altruism as either a form of domination that limits freedom, an unethical or irrational principle, or an extension of some egoistic root cause.<ref name=":1" />

In evolutionary theory, [[biological altruism]] is the observed occurrence of an organism acting to the benefit of others at the cost of its own [[reproductive fitness]]. While biological egoism does grant that an organism may act to the benefit of others, it describes only such when in accordance with reproductive self-interest. [[Kin altruism]] and [[selfish gene theory]] are examples of this division.<ref name=":8" /><ref name=":14">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Biological Altruism |first=Samir |last=Okasha |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |year=2020 |editor-first=Edward N. |editor-last=Zalta |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/altruism-biological/}}</ref> On biological altruism, the ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'' states: "Contrary to what is often thought, an evolutionary approach to human behaviour does not imply that humans are likely to be motivated by self-interest alone. One strategy by which ‘selfish genes’ may increase their future representation is by causing humans to be ''non''-selfish, in the psychological sense."<ref name=":14"/> This is a central topic within contemporary discourse of psychological egoism.<ref name=":2" />

Philosophies of [[personal identity]] such as [[open individualism]] have implications for egoism and altruism. [[Daniel Kolak]] argues that closed individualism, the idea that one's identity consists of a line stretching across time and that a [[future self]] exists, is incoherent.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Kolak |first=Daniel |url=https://digitalphysics.ru/pdf/Kaminskii_A_V/Kolak_I_Am_You.pdf |title=I Am You: The Metaphysical Foundations for Global Ethics |date=2007-11-03 |publisher=Springer Science & Business Media |isbn=978-1-4020-3014-7 |language=en |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240906163443/https://digitalphysics.ru/pdf/Kaminskii_A_V/Kolak_I_Am_You.pdf |archive-date=2024-09-06 |url-status=live}}</ref> Kolak instead argues that personal identity is an illusion, and the "self" doesn't actually exist, similar to the idea of [[anattā]] in Buddhist philosophy. Thus, it could be argued that egoism is incoherent, since there is no "self" in the first place. Similar arguments have been made by [[Derek Parfit]] in the book ''[[Reasons and Persons]]''<ref>{{Cite book |last=Parfit |first=Derek |url=https://archive.org/details/trent_0116300637661/page/n5/mode/2up |title=Reasons and persons |date=1984 |isbn=0-19-824615-3 |location=Oxford [Oxfordshire] |oclc=9827659}}</ref> with ideas such as the [[teletransportation paradox]].

== Relation to nihilism ==
{{Nihilism|expanded=related}}

The history of egoist thought has often overlapped with that of [[nihilism]]. For example, Max Stirner's rejection of absolutes and abstract concepts often places him among the first philosophical nihilists.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|title=Nihilism|encyclopedia=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy|first=Alan|last=Pratt|url=https://iep.utm.edu/nihilism/ }}</ref> The popular description of Stirner as a [[moral nihilist]], however, may fail to encapsulate certain subtleties of his ethical thought. The ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'' states, "Stirner is clearly committed to the non-nihilistic view that certain kinds of character and modes of behaviour (namely autonomous individuals and actions) are to be valued above all others. His conception of morality is, in this respect, a narrow one, and his rejection of the legitimacy of moral claims is not to be confused with a denial of the propriety of all normative or ethical judgement."<ref name=":10" /> Stirner's nihilism may instead be understood as [[Nihilism#Cosmic nihilism|cosmic nihilism]].<ref name="Crosby1998">{{cite encyclopedia |last=Crosby |first=Donald A. |title=Nihilism |year=1998 |doi=10.4324/9780415249126-N037-1 |encyclopedia=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=[[Routledge]], [[Taylor & Francis]] |isbn=9780415250696 |at=§ Cosmic nihilism}}</ref> Likewise, both normative and descriptive theories of egoism further developed under [[Russian nihilism]], shortly giving birth to [[rational egoism]]. Nihilist philosophers [[Dmitry Pisarev]] and [[Nikolay Chernyshevsky]] were influential in this regard, compounding such forms of egoism with [[hard determinism]].<ref name=":16" /><ref name=":11">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Pisarev, Dmitry Ivanovich |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of Russian History |access-date=August 11, 2020 |via=Encyclopedia.com |url=https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/pisarev-dmitry-ivanovich}}</ref><ref name=":12">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Chernyshevskii, Nikolai Gavrilovich (1828–1889) |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=August 11, 2020 |via=Encyclopedia.com |url=https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/chernyshevskii-nikolai-gavrilovich-1828-1889}}</ref>

[[Max Stirner|Max Stirner's]] philosophy strongly rejects [[modernity]] and is highly critical of the increasing dogmatism and oppressive social institutions that embody it. In order that it might be surpassed, egoist principles are upheld as a necessary advancement beyond the modern world.<ref name=":10" /> The ''Stanford Encyclopedia'' states that Stirner's historical analyses serve to "undermine historical narratives which portray the modern development of humankind as the progressive realisation of freedom, but also to support an account of individuals in the modern world as increasingly oppressed".<ref name=":10" /> This critique of humanist discourses especially has linked Stirner to more contemporary [[poststructuralist]] thought.<ref name=":10" />

== Political egoism ==
{{Further|Egoist anarchism|Anti-statism#Egoism|l2=Egoism and anti-statism|Objectivism and libertarianism}}

Since normative egoism rejects the [[moral obligation]] to subordinate the ego to [[society]]-at-large or to a [[ruling class]], it may be predisposed to certain political implications. The ''[[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'' states:
{{Blockquote|text=Egoists ironically can be read as moral and political egalitarians glorifying the dignity of each and every person to pursue life as they see fit. Mistakes in securing the proper means and appropriate ends will be made by individuals, but if they are morally responsible for their actions they not only will bear the consequences but also the opportunity for adapting and learning.<ref name=":1" />}}

In contrast with this however, such an ethic may not morally obligate against the egoistic exercise of power over others. On these grounds, Friedrich Nietzsche criticizes egalitarian morality and political projects as unconducive to the development of human excellence.<ref name=":3" /> [[Max Stirner]]'s own conception, the [[union of egoists]] as detailed in his work ''[[The Ego and Its Own]]'', saw a proposed form of societal relations whereby limitations on egoistic action are rejected.<ref name=":5">{{cite journal |title=The union of egoists |journal=Non Serviam |volume=1 |first=Svein Olav |last=Nyberg |pages=13–14 |location=Oslo, Norway |publisher=Svein Olav Nyberg |oclc=47758413 |access-date=August 19, 2020 |archive-date=December 7, 2010 |url-status=dead |url=http://i-studies.com/journal/n/pdf/nsi-17.pdf#page=13 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101207042220/http://i-studies.com/journal/n/pdf/nsi-17.pdf#page=13}}</ref> When posthumously adopted by the [[anarchist movement]], this became the foundation for [[egoist anarchism]].

Stirner's variant of [[property theory]] is similarly dialectical, where the concept of [[ownership]] is only that personal distinction made between what is one's property and what is not. Consequentially, it is the exercise of control over property which constitutes the nonabstract possession of it.<ref name =":5"/> In contrast to this, [[Ayn Rand]] incorporates capitalist [[property rights (economics)|property rights]] into her egoist theory.<ref name=":6">{{cite encyclopedia |year=2005 |title=Ayn Rand (1905–1982) |encyclopedia=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |url=https://iep.utm.edu/rand/ |last=Hicks |first=Stephen R. C. |author-link=Stephen Hicks}}</ref>

=== Revolutionary politics ===
Egoist philosopher [[Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevskii]] was the dominant intellectual figure behind the 1860–1917 revolutionary movement in Russia, which resulted in the [[assassination of Alexander II|assassination of Tsar Alexander II]] eight years before his death in 1889.<ref name=":12" /><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Narodnaya Volya (Russian revolutionary organization) |encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Narodnaya-Volya-Russian-revolutionary-organization/}}</ref> [[Dmitry Pisarev]] was a similarly radical influence within the movement, though he did not personally advocate political revolution.<ref name=":11"/>

Philosophical egoism has also found wide appeal among anarchist revolutionaries and thinkers, such as [[John Henry Mackay]], [[Benjamin Tucker]], [[Émile Armand]], [[Han Ryner]] [[Gérard de Lacaze-Duthiers]], [[Renzo Novatore]], [[Miguel Giménez Igualada]], and [[Lev Chernyi]]. Though he did not involve in any revolutionary movements himself, the entire school of [[individualist anarchism]] owes much of its intellectual heritage to [[Max Stirner]].

Egoist philosophy may be misrepresented as a principally revolutionary field of thought. However, neither Hobbesian nor Nietzschean theories of egoism approve of political revolution. Anarchism and [[revolutionary socialism]] were also strongly rejected by Ayn Rand and her followers.

=== Fascism ===
The philosophies of both Nietzsche and Stirner were heavily appropriated (or possibly expropriated) by [[fascist]] and [[proto-fascist]] ideologies. Nietzsche in particular has infamously been represented as a predecessor to [[Nazism]] and a substantial academic effort was necessary to disassociate his ideas from their aforementioned appropriation.<ref name=":7">{{cite book |title=Main Currents of Marxism |first=Leszek |last=Kołakowski |author-link=Leszek Kołakowski |orig-year=1st pub. 1976 |year=2005 |publisher=[[W.W. Norton and Company]] |pages=137–138}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Keith |last=Ansell-Pearson |title=An Introduction to Nietzsche as Political Thinker: The Perfect Nihilist |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |year=1994 |pages=33–34}}</ref>

{{quote|text=At first sight, Nazi totalitarianism may seem the opposite of Stirner's radical individualism. But fascism was above all an attempt to dissolve the social ties created by history and replace them by artificial bonds among individuals who were expected to render explicit obedience to the state on grounds of absolute egoism. Fascist education combined the tenets of asocial egoism and unquestioning conformism, the latter being the means by which the individual secured his own niche in the system. Stirner's philosophy has nothing to say against conformism, it only objects to the Ego being subordinated to any higher principle: the egoist is free to adjust to the world if it is clear he will better himself by doing so. His 'rebellion' may take the form of utter servility if it will further his interest; what he must not do is to be bound by 'general' values or myths of humanity. The totalitarian ideal of a barrack-like society from which all real, historical ties have been eliminated is perfectly consistent with Stirner's principles: the egoist, by his very nature, must be prepared to fight under any flag that suits his convenience.<ref name=":7" />|author=[[Leszek Kołakowski]]|source=''[[Main Currents of Marxism]]'', pp.137-138}}

== See also ==
{{Wiktionary|egoism|egoist|egoistic}}

* {{anl|Altruism}}
* {{anl|Enlightened self-interest}}
* {{anl|Homo economicus}}
* {{anl|Individualism}}
* {{anl|Individualist anarchism}}
* {{anl|Machiavellianism (psychology)}}
* {{anl|Selfishness}}
* {{anl|Selfism}}
* {{anl|Suitheism}}

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Egoism| ]]
[[Category:Ethical schools and movements]]
[[Category:Individualism]]
[[Category:Consequentialism]]
[[Category:Philosophy of life]]