Final answer:
The unrefuted objection to ethical egoism can be challenged by recognizing the difference between strong and weak egoism and understanding that self-interest can indirectly result in common good, though this is not without potential conflict.
Step-by-step explanation:
Refuting an Objection to Ethical Egoism
The unrefuted objection to ethical egoism posits that if everyone pursued their own self-interest exclusively, a paradox would arise: the egoist would not benefit from a world of egoists. However, this objection can be challenged on several fronts. Firstly, one must distinguish between strong ethical egoism, which dictates always acting in one's own self-interest, and weak ethical egoism, which allows for the pursuit of self-interest without necessitating it in every circumstance. Secondly, the theory of egoism as a means to the common good, as exemplified by Adam Smith's invisible hand, suggests that the pursuit of individual self-interest can lead to the betterment of the collective indirectly. This implies a resolve to the objection, as individuals acting in self-interest may not always result in a detrimental outcome for others.
An additional consideration is the fallacy that pursuing one's own interest inevitably leads to an aggregate promotion of everyone's interest—conflicts do arise. Moreover, the purely self-interested worldview of the ethical egoist may be critiqued for its lack of moral foundation needed for social living, suggesting that some form of ethical regulation or social contract might be necessary even in an egoist framework to prevent detrimental outcomes.