In order to properly display his thoughts circling around the selfishness that everyone has, Harry Browne uses an example involving different examples of various ways of living. Browne compares a lying thief, a charitable worker, a working-class man, a loving mother, and a career singer, suggesting that they all have one aspect of life in common; they are all doing what they believe what will bring them the most happiness. Browne suggests that it is useless to separate these people based on the stereotypical view on ‘selfishness’ and ‘unselfishness’ because they are all selfish in the sense that they do what they do to bring happiness about themselves.
What evidence or argument does Browne offer in opposition to the claim that “it would be a better world if everyone were unselfish”? …show more content…
As he mentioned in his essay, no one is a mind reader and can even determine what a person actually wants. Therefore, using time and effort in order to make someone happy when it may not even work is not going to make a person content. Also, the reason I do not disagree with this is because it would not eliminate the idea of continuing to help people and commit unselfish acts. I say this with the idea that helping others brings some people pure joy. However, just because I believe that this would bring about the most happiness does not mean that I believe it is morally right or what the world should do. I believe the world is lacking compassion and that under certain circumstances, not everyone would benefit from pure selfishness (e.g. the homeless). This being said, yes, I believe pure, unadulterated selfishness would bring about the most happiness, but for the sake of those it would not benefit, I do not think this is one that humans act