Asking a question does not mean you don't know the answer to it and in this case lots of input from different sources is valuable to me.
i should mention, that people who give loyalty and do not expect loyalty back, then they must expect something else in return.
however if they do not get what they expect and continue to give loyalty because they are promised that they will eventually get a reward, or are too scared to stop being loyal, are just stupid.
by SymphonyYou are correct that all "altruism" actually derives itself from a selfish impulse to be "altruistic," and that what is "for the greater good," and what is not, is largely subjective. I perceive altruism as the tendency to self-sacrifice for the benefit of others—which is itself is a satiation of the emotional drive to be a "valuable person," or "to reflexively do what is right."
The distinction between egoism and altruism has little to do with what I had previously discussed about: The valuations of loyalty. All "altruism" is inherently selfish, except in species incapable of rational judgment (is this not self-evident?). And thus, selfishness is presupposed as a fundamental characteristic of all humans. How selfishness manifests itself in individuals varies quite radically; that variation constitutes what I meant by a spectrum of conscience within humanity.
Someone could do something such as throw a brick through a window and hit you on the head. However this gives ambulance crew a job, it gives a window maker economic opportunity, and it gives the brickthrower a great deal of pleasure. So at least 3 people are advancing in society and you spend some time in a hospital. No big deal.
You become loyal to the hospital. The brickthrower becomes loyal to themselves. We could discuss this shit forever. It doesn't make any difference.
Sometimes people are loyal, sometimes they aren't, and you could try and get people to sign a contract, for anything, business, marriage, but contracts don't mean anything, they are just a piece of legal paper.