American History

Ethical Egoism theory has been proposed by Max Stirner, Thomas Hobbes and David Gauthier. There are three different types of Ethical Egoism Individual, Personal and Universal.  Ethical Egoism states that an action is ethical if the consequences of that action result in more benefit to the person performing that action. It concentrates on individual interests and argues that actions of a person should be motivated by hisher own self. Each action should be performed with the motive of self-interest. Ethical Egoism does not say that a person should bring harm to others. But a person should pursue self-interest irrespective of its consequences on others. For example, if a person behaves honestly because it brings benefit to him her then it is Ethical Egoism. The Ethical Egoism considers that action is morally right if it maximizes ones own good (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2002). It is immoral if ones own interests are neglected in doing good to others.

Utilitarianism
The main exponents of Utilitarian Ethical Theory were Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill.The Utilitarian ethical theory claim that the utility (consequence) of an action matters.  The moral worth of an action depends solely upon its utility (New World Encyclopedia, 2008). An action is good if it brings greatest happiness to greatest number of people. So a person must consider the likely consequences of the action. Utilitarian ethical theory is of two types act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. According to Act Utilitarian, an action is ethical if it results in maximum happiness to maximum number of people. According to Jeremy Bentham,

An act is right from an ethical point of view if, and only if, the sum total of utilities produced by that act is greater than the sum total utilities produced by another act the agent could have performed in its place.

The Rule Utilitarian states that an ethical behavior is determined by rules. A person should follow the rule that would result in good consequences if generally followed. There are two types of rules Strong Rule and Weak Rule. A strong rule must be followed by all the people for all the time. It cannot be broken. There is no exception to the rule. The Weak Rule is not strict in nature and if breaking the rule brings more utility (if it produces the greatest happiness to greatest number of people), it can be broken. For example, if the rule is Dont tell a lie. A Strong Rule says that this rule should be followed at any cost and under all circumstances. The Weak Rule would say that if telling a lie brings happiness under some specific circumstances it can be broken.
Kantianism

Kant concludes that a good will is the only thing which is good without qualification, or in itself  (Kant, 2008). The promotion of happiness is not a moral act because even happiness can lead to bad state such as arrogance. If happiness and virtue result in bad state it is because of bad will. Therefore an action is moral if it is performed with goodwill and out of respect for moral law. The performance of ones duty is essential for establishment of good will. Morality does not depend upon human nature but it is categorical imperative. Categorical Imperative is the maxim that must be followed unconditionally. For example, Always tell the truth is a categorical imperative and must be followed under all circumstances. Moral law has universal application and is applicable to all rational human beings under all circumstances and without any exceptions. Kant believed that moral laws can only be discovered a priori (through acts of reasoning) and not from experience.
Differences and Similarities

Ethical Egoism and Utilitarian ethical theories have been derived from Consequentialism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2006). These theories state that moral worth of an action can be known by the consequences of that action. Both Ethical Egoism and Utilitarianism argue that a person must think about the consequences of hisher action to know the rightness and wrongness of an action. The Ethical Egoism tends to maximize self-interests and does not consider the interests of others in knowing the moral worth of an action whereas Utilitarianism and Kantianism both give weight to the interests of others.

Kants ethical theory differs from empirically derived ethical theories. Kants ethical theory is derived from deontological ethics (or study of duty). It states that the consequences of an action cannot validate the morality of that action and empirical motives (such as self-interest) can also lead us away from morality. So we need to have a priori moral law and it should be followed irrespective of the consequences it produces. According to Kant, the goal of morality or moral laws is not to produce happiness or pleasure but goodwill.

2. Which of these three systems do you find most compelling Give your reasons or argument.
Kants ethical theory is more compelling than Ethical Egoism and Utilitarianism. Kants moral philosophy is based on his idea of good will. It states that morality does not depend upon consequences of the action performed because we cannot always predict the consequences of our actions. Kant says that goodwill is most important thing in morality. The moral worth of an action cannot be determined by its outcome but it is the motive behind the action that matters. For example if a person is honest because he is afraid of being caught by someone, then he is not working according to goodwill and his motives cannot be considered moral.

The only thing that is good in this world is good will. Even happiness and Intelligence are not good without qualification. Goodwill does not have inferior motives of self interest, happiness etc. Goodwill is inherently good and does not depend on the consequences of the action. A person with goodwill can never be immoral. Kant stated that even the motives of bringing happiness to other people can lead us to a bad state (such as arrogance) and can decrease our morality. So the highest motive is to do our duty with goodwill and in adherence to moral law. The duty must be performed irrespective of any gain or loss to self or others (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2005). To do this, we need to have a priori moral law and it should be followed irrespective of the consequences it produces.