But it is not clear what any such explanatory account shows.What “loyalty” may have begun as (defense of the group against threat) and what it has come to be for reflective beings need not be the same.Although our primary loyalties tend to be associations or groupings that are socially valued, such that loyalty may seem to be an important practical disposition, this need not be the case.
But it is not clear what any such explanatory account shows.What “loyalty” may have begun as (defense of the group against threat) and what it has come to be for reflective beings need not be the same.Although our primary loyalties tend to be associations or groupings that are socially valued, such that loyalty may seem to be an important practical disposition, this need not be the case.Tags: Boxes And Bullets Personal And Persuasive EssaysWhere To Bind My Dissertation In ManchesterThesis Statement About Teenage DepressionIdeas For A Piece Of Creative WritingMusic DissertationDistance Learning Ma Creative WritingClassification Essay About ArtEssay Paper WritingDevelopments In Transportation EssayRobert Malthus Essay On Populations
The strong feelings and devotion often associated with loyalty have led some to assert that loyalty is only or primarily a feeling or sentiment—an affective bondedness that may express itself in deeds, the latter more as an epiphenomenon than as its core.
As Ewin puts it, it is an “instinct to sociability” (Ewin, 1990, 4; cf. But feelings of loyalty are probably not constitutive of loyalty, even if it is unusual to find loyalty that is affectless.
For the most part, an association that we come to value for its own sake is also one with which we come to identify (as ).
The nature of loyal attachment is a matter of debate.
Arguably, the test of loyalty is conduct rather than intensity of feeling, primarily a certain “stickingness” or perseverance—the loyal person acts for or stays with or remains committed to the object of loyalty even when it is likely to be disadvantageous or costly to the loyal person to do so.
Those who focus on loyalty as a sentiment often intend to deny that loyalty might be rationally motivated.
Our loyalties are not just to any groups that may exist, or even to any group with which we have some association, but only to those to which we are sufficiently closely bound to call country, not yours, unless yours are also mine.
In such identifications, the fate or well-being of the objects of loyalty become bound up with one’s own. We will take extra risks or bear special burdens for them.
That had an interesting offshoot as monarchical feudalism lost sway: loyal subjects who were torn by the venality of sitting sovereigns found it necessary—as part of their effort to avoid charges of treason—to distinguish their ongoing loyalty to the institution of kingship from their loyalty to a particular king.
As a working definition, loyalty can be characterized as a practical disposition to persist in an intrinsically valued (though not necessarily valuable) associational attachment, where that involves a potentially costly commitment to secure or at least not to jeopardize the interests or well-being of the object of loyalty.