Didymos Thomas;15299 wrote:
Psychological egoism is non falsifiable.
First, let me ask you this;
By definition, no!
'Empiricism' has fallen, my friend, your words echo from the 'middle ages'...
You attempt to divorce the entire field of psychology, noetics, Consciousness, etc... from the philosophical sphere, which encompasses all
perspectives of human thought and critical fields of inquiry, arbitrarily, because it fails to fulfill some erroneous scientific/logical notion, long since discredited?? Made obsolete, finally, by quantum physics; the 'final' nail in the 'empirical/objective fantasy' coffin.
Psychological egoism is the notion that all human action is, ultimately, selfish.
Really? See Wiki below, nowhere will you find the emotionally biased term 'selfish' (for good reason);
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Psychological egoism is the view that humans are always motivated by rational self-interest, even in what seem to be acts of altruism. It can be contrasted both with ethical egoism, which is the view that the individual always ought to be motivated by self-interest and disregard the interests of the community, and rational egoism, which asserts that the rational thing to do in all situations is that which furthers the actor's interests the most. It claims that when sane people choose to help others, it is ultimately because of the personal benefits they themselves expect to obtain, directly or indirectly, from doing so. Psychological egoism is controversial; some see it as an over-simplified interpretation of behavior, others argue that there exists evidence of altruistic behavior.
Just the first paragraph, but I assure you that nowhere is indicated anything as you assert.
This may not be pleasing to many on the forum, but egoism has long been abandoned as a serious answer to philosophical problems.
By whom? Can we have a 'celebrity endorsement'?