The Ethics of Friendship
Is it right for a best friend to wear a wire to try to catch his best friend who is suspected of a string of arsons? That was the underlying theme of NBC's Dateline on Sunday evening. It was an intriguing mystery about some seemingly eco-terrorism style arsons in the Arizona desert. The police eventually used the arsonist's best friend to capture him- to get a confession.

Part of the discussion was "How can my best friend have done something like that? He lied to me." There was almost an arrogance to the response: "I trusted him and he betrayed me. He just got into the game of being an undercover agent."

I can see the attitude if the guy had been innocent. Then the attitude would have been appropriate- He didn't believe me. Well, no, in some ways he didn't. And he shouldn't have. The "anti-social" attitude presented by the arsonist in that section of the interview was quite clear. The self-centeredness was obvious.

The real question I think is "Where do the duties of friendship end? Should a 'best friend' do this?"

My immediate answer is, "Of course." To do otherwise is to be an "enabler." Is "friendship" more important than what is legally right? Is "friendship" really friendship when it may be based on the original lies and deception that would be naturally part of the life of an arsonist? And, naturally the "friend" caught in the lie would be angry and feel betrayed. But who did the betrayal of trust first?

I know all the comments that come from this. I also know that all of us have "secrets" and other stuff that even our best friends don't necessarily know. But the secrets and even thinking style of people who are involved in "anti-social/criminal" behavior are different. Such a person will not- and cannot understand why what they are doing is the cause of the break in friendship. It will always be their friends fault. He should have trusted me. He should have believed me. It never comes to mind that they are using the friend to hide. He should have believed me is NEVER followed by "when I was lying to him and hiding my real self from him."

Probably the most telling exchange took place at the end of the show. The arsonist was asked if he has forgiven his friend. He responded that he had. No emotion. No remorse.

The friend was then asked the same question.
"Have you forgiven your friend?"
"I'm working on it."
"Have you forgiven yourself?"
"I'm working on it."

No easy answers. The man with a conscience is still struggling with the whole issue. Which is why we have a conscience in the first place. In that lies the difference between the two.

Good, thought provoking show.