Abstract
“Egoism,” “self-love,” and “selfishness” are often used interchangeably, creating a moral blur. Philosophical egoism, an ontology of the self, postulates individuals isolated from the world and one another. Philosophical egoism is not selfishness; it is an illusion. There are no pure selves. Were philosophical egoism true, there could be neither self-love nor selfishness. Descriptive egoism asserts that humans always act from self-interest; prescriptive egoism holds that they should. Descriptive egoism excludes self-love and selfishness. Prescriptive egoism eliminates the moral distinction between self-love and selfishness, losing both. Criticisms of descriptive and prescriptive egoism do not go deep enough. Both presuppose the unworldly self. Egoism slurs inescapable “mineness” with self-interestedness. But egoism’s self-interest is a placeholder not a motivator: choices are presumed self-interested. Left indeterminate, self-interest is a pseudo-concept; self-love and selfishness are not. Counterposing an unworldly altruismaltruism" only bolsters an egoism certain that self-satisfaction motivates the altruist.