This past year, I have watched both myself and those around me become wrapped up in conflict time and time again. The frequency of this drove me to begin questioning things.

Why do we so often find ourselves hurting someone else, or being hurt by someone else?

Egoism is the theory that oneself is, or should be, the motivation behind one's actions. From egoism, there are two variants: descriptive and normative. The descriptive variant explains that egoism is, in fact, a factual description of the way humans function, whereas the normative variant explains that this is how humans should function and find motivation.

A derivative of egoism is psychological egosim: the idea that all human behavior is driven by an inherent self-interest. This, if you ask me, is a good explanation as to why we end up hurting.

This idea that everything we do is something that we do for ourselves is, right off the bat, a major potential source of conflict. Take toxic relationships, for example. These are toxic because the two people involved are not seeing eye to eye in some way, and I think this is often because they have two different goals when it comes down to what they want for themselves.

Sometimes we see toxic relationships in which one party is only in it for the physical aspect, whereas the other person is emotionally involved. In this instance, there is a fundamental difference between what is in the best interest of these two people.

This also holds true for self-serving friendships and any other type of relationship that can't necessarily be labelled.

I think it is also interesting to consider this when dealing with disagreements, whether it be with friends, family, or a significant other. When it comes to arguments, it is generally very easy to focus only on what you want and what is in your own best interest, forgetting what might be in the interest of the other party. When I say this, I think it applies both to the way in which the disagreement is approached, as well as its resolution. For example, some people might approach a disagreement or conflict by choosing to avoid interaction altogether, whereas others do choose to talk it out and find common ground or come to some sort of resolution. If you ask me, the first of these two options doesn't really bring satisfaction to either party involved. Either way, though, I think that the way a person chooses to approach the situation is very telling of where their priorities lie.

In my opinion, I think there are levels of psychological egoism, if psychological egoism is the assumption you choose to believe. In situations where a person is continually hurting others, maybe unintentionally, but undeniably, I think it is a case where that person's psychological egoism is too overwhelming. In this instance, that person would be driven to do things only in ways that end up benefiting them.

Another point which I think is interesting to consider here is the concept of revenge. Oftentimes, when someone else does us wrong or hurts us in some way, some people might want revenge. If not as a way of evening out the playing field, revenge might be desired as a way of getting back at that other person. Either way, revenge can, to some extent, be linked back to this notion of psychological egoism. If our actions are driven by self-interest, this desire for revenge makes perfect sense in that those who seek it believe it would end up lessening their pain.

A "subcategory" of sorts of psychological egoism is psychological hedonism, which is the idea that our actions are driven by the desire for pleasure and desire to avoid pain. That being said, seeking out revenge to ameliorate one's own pain or to bring pleasure by causing another person pain does remain consistent with psychological hedonism. Within this concept, "pleasure" is defined broadly, serving as an umbrella term which includes joy, satisfaction, contentment, etc.. In a similar manner, "pain" serves as an umbrella term for any negative feeling such as anxiousness, frustration, regret, or any form of discomfort.

Another interesting subcategory is ethical egoism, which is the theory that anything that promotes one's best interest is also in accordance with morality. There are two versions of this, one which states that it is never moral not to promote one's own good, and another which states that it is not necessarily never moral not to promote one's own good. This second version is interesting to consider, because in this version one can account for instances in which a person's self-interest would not generally be considered good or moral in a larger sense. For example, an instance in which someone's "own good" calls for some sort of pain to be inflicted on someone else.

Whether or not you believe in egoism is up to you but I believe that it can, to some extent, be used to explain why we hurt others or end up being hurt by others.