We have a tendency to look at matters from our western culture that is individualistic. What we may forget is that the ‘flourishing’ or ‘harm’ depends on whose flourishing or harm we are talking about.
Many ancient cultures and even modern cultures in the East value the good of the society or family more than the good of the individual. Also the ancient Hebrews (OT people) had such a culture. The logic behind this kind of thinking seems rational: when the benefit and future of many conflicts with the interests of one person, we should weigh the good of many more than the good of a single person. Simple ethical cost-benefit analysis.
There are practical problems with this kind of ‘society first’ thinking: those making the decisions do not often truly act for the benefit of the whole society but try to advance the benefit of few (a leading group) or one (the person himself). So, the basically healthy idea is seldom true in the real life.
Even within the individualistic western culture, there are conflicts of interests between persons. To mention a potentially flammable example, there is a conflict of interest between a woman and her fetus. Should we put more emphasis on the rights of the woman to ‘do with my body what I want’, or the rights of the unborn child?
I do not tell what would be the ‘ethically correct’ answer, just point to the fact that there are such conflicts of interests.