I am sorry if this is too broad of a question/a not so common or a more particular, personal problem than I think it is.
It just happened to me, but it is not the first time. In the past, there have been occurrences when I've faced the decision on whether or not to keep talking/interacting with someone after I learned something I didn't expect about them.
For example, a radical ideology I feel affects very negatively to others, but not me, or, in this recent instance, someone who doesn't care how their actions affect people they do are not close with. Even if those actions can cause serious harm, at a personal/emotional/professional level.
Now, I'm not some kind of moral authority, but I wonder, from a ethical point of view, how to react to this situation. If I break down my options, I would sum them like:
- I can ignore the situation and pretend everything is alright, since it does not affect me, and I have a positive relationship with this person!
- I can try and argue and fight to "teach" someone who I am not in charge of to do better. This can have a positive impact, if I were to be right in the first place, and if I could somehow make the person see things in a different light. But it is not my duty and it can cost me a good friendship.
- I can cut ties with this person, because not doing so would be the same as condoning this behaviour.
So, this leads me to think. What are different approaches in literature? As I mentioned I feel close to what little I know about utilitarianism, but I bet there are dozens of possible ways to look at this type of problem. Of course there are no hard and fast rules, but I would love to know and to learn of different approaches to this problem from a philosofycal point of view.
Like, what if the person is an actively racist person? Or someone who mistreats women, or who despises some certaing group?
Is it ethical to have a different approach to this problem, one in the case it affects you, and one in the case it doesn't?