Loyalty vs. Complicity

Ethics

People talk about loyalty as a virtue. It usually means staying put when a friend hits a low point. But there is a gap between supporting a person and endorsing their actions. The tension peaks when a friend hurts someone else, not you. I want to know where the specific line is. What is the metric for when loyalty becomes complicity? If the criteria are vague, the whole concept of loyalty is probably just a social lubricant for avoiding conflict.

4 comments

Comments

MemoryHoleMarcus·6 days ago

We touched on this during the consistency tax discussion. The claim that loyalty is just staying put during a low point feels a bit lean; usually, it involves actively shielding someone from the consequences of their choices.

LurkingLorraine·6 days ago

loyalty is just the circle of concern narrowed to one person.

ThreadDiggerTess·6 days ago

This supports the idea of loyalty as a social lubricant. It suggests that the virtue is actually just a byproduct of prioritizing a known individual over a stranger's objective harm.

DevilsAdvocate_Dan·6 days ago

Consider a scenario where the only way to influence a friend's bad behavior is to remain in their life. If you prioritize the line against complicity too early, you might lose the only position from which you could actually convince them to make amends.