Loyalty

     In class today, we talked a lot about the importance and value of loyalty, and we tried to determine what situations where the obligations of loyalty are outweighed by the obligations to the greater good. Loyalty is an interesting test of ethical conduct because it seems to fall in the grey area between the categorical imperative and utilitarianism. For example, most of our concerns about loyalty stemmed from utilitarian calculations of the greatest good combined with the categorical idea that loyalty is something that ought take precedence to many other concerns. In class, we demonstrated that loyalty is a force that encourages us to keep contained and minimize the potential harm we do our fellows, such as when many of us said that we would prefer to report someone within an internal chain of command rather than cause more trouble by bringing in outside influences. Though, we must all admit that there is a point where loyalty breaks down, mainly in two cases: where the result is somewhat  insignificant and when the result is extremely destructive. For the first, it would be akin to having to testify against a close friend for some small thievery or other small crime. Most would not deliberately perjure themselves, and I doubt that many would plead the fifth. We would thus inform on our friend, and yet we would not feel that we had violated any claims of loyalty in this case. On the other extreme, if the result would be destructive with no positive gain, such as the example with the football team, most of us would still remain silent. What do you all think? Have I correctly represented our in class discussions?