Obligation to Society, Loyalty to Community

Obligation is displayed toward rules or requirements of formalized roles stemming from membership in society, whereas loyalty is shown to persons and is founded upon communal commitment to them. Loyalties entail obligations, but the converse does not necessarily hold. While one may have obligations toward everyone, it is neither conceptually nor psychologically possible to be loyal to all persons. Thus, loyalty is particularizing in a way that obligation is not. Loyalty is more likely to exist in communal cooperation, whereas obligation is typically prominent in social, that is, contractual, cooperation. The claim that loyalty is a virtue is criticized, since loyalty can be displayed on behalf of malevolent individuals or pernicious requirements associated with them. Finally, the distinction between a found community and a community of choice is explored; and the loyalties of residents in the latter are argued to be more enriching. The aim of this article is to distinguish between the concepts of obligation and loyalty by explicating their respective relationships to society and to community. Examination of the former relationship will call attention to the category of rules and regulations, which mandate obedient compliance; examination of the latter will focus upon vital commitments to persons and to the community, of whatever size, of which they are a part. My interpretations may on occasion be somewhat unconventional, but I believe they are clear and consistent and serve to undergird important normative assessments.