John Kuthe > writes:

> On Feb 23, 4:38*pm, David Dyer-Bennet > wrote:
>> dsi1 > writes:
>> > On 2/23/2012 5:38 AM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>> >> > *writes:
>> >>> No doubt you are correct about this. I can't think of a damn thing.
>>
>> >> Rape-torture-murder of your daughter? *(Or of somebody very important in
>> >> your life.)
>>
>> > Loyalty arises out of obligation. If you spend time thinking of
>> > reasons to get out of your obligations, you haven't quite gotten the
>> > concept of loyalty. As it goes, I'm only loyal to my wife and kids and
>> > my dad. My father has people that are loyal to him and I admire him
>> > for that but do not envy his position - I consider that to be a heavy
>> > weight to carry.
>>
>> It's no effort. As I say, you clearly have a rather mild imagination.
>>
>> From my point of view, you claimed a level of loyalty that was
>> essentially infinite, and *that* isn't something I believe in.
>
> Good point. The only "infinite" loyalty I have is to my son, which is
> exemplified when years ago a boating friend of mine asked me if I
> absolutely HAD to kill one or the other, would I kill my father or my
> son? And I without hesitation I said "My father, and I would expect my
> son to make the same choice if forced to." And he knew that I knew
> exactly what he was getting at my asking such a question.

And with any luck it won't ever come up.

That's the kind of hypothetical I've taken to telling people I can't
really think seriously about (like would I kill a random person for 10
million dollars if I knew it'd never be known I'd done it). I can't
figure out what would convince me that the limited choices in the
hypothetical were actually 1) real, and 2) the only available choices.
If something had actually convinced me -- then everything is different
from my just sitting here telling myself I'm taking those limits as
given, so I might well come to different choices.

Your answer seems to be the obvious one, if you're going to accept the
hypothetical question in the first place. I'd also accept "I'd make the
best attempt I could to kill the person offering me that choice."

> But that absolute notwithstanding, I think it's reasonable to expect a
> somewhat less extreme level of loyalty between long time "friends".

I do too.

> Bryan was the "friend" I had for the longest time of people not
> related by blood to me. And I finally realized what I had been
> suspecting for a LONG time now, that Bryan is no longer any kind of
> "friend" to me, if he ever was. I think he was more in the past. For
> chrissakes, we lived together 3 times, and almost came to fisticuffs
> that 3rd time! But he was never such a deliberate and extreme asshole
> to me as he was here on RFC. Never. That was the level of loyalty we
> used to respect with each other. Being at least minimally decent and
> sometimes better than that to each other.
>
> I knows Bryan will turn this around and say "But you called me
> obsessed!" But he is, as evidenced over and over and over.

That sounds complicated and kind of unfortunate. I haven't had any
friendships deteriorate to that level so far (there are still people I'm
in touch with that I've known since 1968, outside my immediate family).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info