Stanley Milgram's Essay: The Perils Of Obedience

616 Words2 Pages

In the article "The Perils of Obedience" Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, recounts an experiment where he tested how people's obedience varies under extreme circumstances. He discovered having a higher authority in the room dramatically increases obedience (Milgram 88). Meanwhile, in the article "Obedience," Ian Parker, a British writer, is not as quick to jump to conclusions as Milgram. Instead, Parker cites needed information that is missing from Milgram's article. In Stanley Milgram's infamous 1963 experiment, he investigates precisely how far people will go to hurt someone, while still obeying orders from an authority figure. Although it is torture, a portion of the people continue to administer pain upon the test subjects because they are being obedient and following orders. Milgram and Parker both convey strong arguments for their respective points, despite disagreeing on several matters. …show more content…

(Rodrigo) Thus, when the higher power in the room is the one telling them to keep going, the experimenters feel as if it is not their responsibility and they continue with the shocking. However, Parker criticizes Milgram for not conveying all of the information about the experiment. Parker expresses that the test subjects had no way out, or felt trapped, like they had no alternative to obeying the authority figure (Parker 98). The power of situational influence on obedience in society has tremendous implications, as shown by Milgram in this experiment. In an article by Saul McLeod titled "Milgram Experiment", he goes as far as to say that ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure, even to the extend of killing an innocent human being (McLeod). When people are placed in situations such as Milgram's experiment, one's own beliefs and morals can easily be

Open Document