Egoism can be a descriptive or a normative position. It is also hard to think of a plausible argument which has kin altruism as a premiss and rational egoism as the conclusion, so doubts about kin altruism do not seem to undercut arguments for rational egoism. So I am not in a good position to answer this query. But that student also has an interest in enjoying good relations with her housemates. And also, one may list professors in other humanities fields than philosophy. But something close to this argument is plausible, especially for some bad things.
In other words, please explain it! A third confusion occurs when we think that concern for ourselves is incompatible with concern for others. This allows for action that fails to maximize perceived self-interest, but rules out the sort of behavior psychological egoists like to target — such as altruistic behavior or motivation by thoughts of duty alone. It would follow that for me, a distinction between my welfare and that of others would be arbitrary, and the rational egoist claim that each ought to maximize his own welfare would be unjustified when applied to me. But, psychological egoism doesn't admit this. If, say, I break my promises whenever it is in my direct self-interest to do so, others will not accept my promises, and may even attack me.
First, that this comparison with racism seems an appeal to emotion and unnecessarily inflammatory although if a valid concern, the blame lies with the original source, not the editor. Ethical egoism is a normative theory that states that our actions ought to be done from the perspective of self-interest. One might reply with de Lazari-Radek and Singer 2014 191 that there are other ways of arriving at the conclusion that I have reason to care about the well-being of everyone. Say I like anchovies and hate broccoli. He also argued that there was no reason to try to reduce the diversity of human motivations to one simple thing.
The present-aim theory does not. One reason the present-aim theory is important is that it shows there is a coherent, more minimal alternative to rational egoism. Say half of my brain will be transplanted to another body A. However, most notable anarchists in history have been less radical, retaining altruism and a sense of the importance of the individual that is appreciable but does not go as far as egoism. Debate over rational egoism was revitalized by Parfit 1984 pts. I have a distinct history, memories, and perhaps special access to my mental contents.
Natural selection does not always provide back-up mechanisms I have but one liver. The divergence between ethical egoism and standard moral theories appears in other ways. It does not seem that the soldier is pursuing his perceived self-interest. There are many competing egoistic hypotheses. One is a theory about psychology and the other is a prescription for action. Anything else involves turning a blind eye to a certain, never fully escapable except arguably in certain transcendent traditions separation.
An egoist might claim that continuity alone matters for special care; that fits the cases. But rational egoism and kin altruism do make opposed recommendations. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it. From Rand's perspective it seems that the only way to express concern for others is to completely sacrifice one's welfare. If so, it does not follow simply from my possession of x being good that others ought to do anything Prichard 2002 217.
So this theory is saying that an act is right when there is nothing else the agent could do on that occasion that would lead to a consequence that would be better for him in terms of pleasure and pain. Empathy might cause an unpleasant experience that subjects believe they can stop by helping; or subjects might think failing to help in cases of high empathy is more likely to lead to punishment by others, or that helping here is more likely to be rewarded by others; or subjects might think this about self-administered punishment or reward. After all, the soldier did what he most wanted to do, and so must have been pursuing his perceived self-interest. Unless I desired, for its own sake, that others do well, I would not derive welfare from helping them. My old body will be destroyed. There have been extensive criticisms made of ethical egoism, many of which are not religious in their character at all. It makes them feel good.
Apparently altruistic action is often revealed to be self-interested. Both on the criticism and the proponent views? Obviously, much here depends on the claim about the aim of moralists. A common objection to psychological egoism, made famously by Joseph Butler, is that I must desire things other than my own welfare in order to get welfare. It is not clear that F 1 has reason to care specially about F 3 — F 3 might seem a stranger, perhaps even an unlikeable one. One might cite our most confident judgments about rational action and claim that rational egoism best fits these. Ethical egoism explains why this principle holds -- it explains the ground of our obligation.