“In the heart of nation’s capital, in a courthouse of the U.S government, one man will stop at nothing to keep his honor, and one will stop at nothing to find the truth.” This tagline helps to sum up the tone of the film A Few Good Men. Two soldiers caught in the middle of right and wrong will keep there hope and loyalty high as they wish for the best. Will the instigator of it all be pressured through his own anger to reveal the truth? Rob Reiner presents Col. Nathan R. Jessep as having an exaggerated self opinion while using his power for evil, based on dispositional factors.
Lt. Daniel Kaffee uses his Harvard law education to represent two Marines who are being charged for murder in the movie A Few Good Men. Lt. Cdr. JoAnne Galloway and Lt. Sam Weinberg assist Kaffee on his investigation, thought to be a Code Red, a form of abusive peer discipline. While conversing with Jessep and his two senior officers in Cuba, Kaffee becomes suspicious about certain information given. In the end, Kaffee is triumphant over the case by proving Jessep’s guilt. Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, introduces his opinion on obedience in his article, “The Perils of Obedience,” while discussing the background to his experiment. An experimenter ordered the unaware teacher to give the learner agonizing shocks, not knowing that the learner was not truly hooked up to the voltage. The experimenter’s goal was to make sure that the teacher followed all orders, even if that meant supposedly harming the learner. Surprisingly, more people obeyed the experimenter rather than following the instinct to help the learner. Likewise, Erich Fromm, a psychoanalyst and philosopher, claims that obedience and disobedience both can have good and bad consequences. From...
... middle of paper ...
...of two marines, to perform a code red on Santiago, the learner. Although no harm was intended, the life of an ailing soldier was brutally taken due to the respect of an order. From Fromm’s outlook on the situation, obedience may sometimes be right, but unfortunately might lead to an unwanted outcome, similar to the circumstances portrayed in A Few Good Men. A person with hateful and self conceited characteristics is someone that most people don’t want to be around. This can impact society by causing less appreciation among people.
Works Cited
A Few Good Men. Dir. Rob Reiner. Perf. Jack Nicholson, Tom Cruise, and Demi Moore. Columbia Pictures, 1992. Film.
Fromm, Erich. “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem” Writing and Reading for ACP Composition. Ed. Thomas E. Leahy and Christine R. Farris. New York, New York: Pearson, 2009. 258-263. Print.
Exploration of Civil Disobedience in Sophocles' Antigone, King's Letter from Birmingham Jail, and Plato's From Crito
Fearful of the outrageous threat of death against him, Kendrick complies with the unjust order of the Code Red due to the strict conduct that the members of the Marine Corps must adhere to, although the order was morally incorrect. Fromm effectively explains why Kendrick was quick to obey Jessep for the belief that “work cannot be done properly if nothing but fear is behind the obedience” (Fromm 127). Kendrick was not able to clearly identify a sensible morality, thus portraying the reality of Fromm’s beliefs that blind obedience is derived from corrupt motives. Fromm continues by discussing that obedience must be instigated by a formidable force of legitimate authority before the act of compliance can occur, and Jessep was the seemingly legitimate authority portrayed in the movie (Fromm 127). Michelle Sada, a Penn State Representative, would concur with Fromm due to her idea that individuals disregard the negative outcomes of situations prior to a decision derived from fear (Sada). Sada would likely agree that Kendrick’s intense military training was the source of his terror, because the consequences of disobeying the orders of superiors were of immense gravity. Furthermore, Szegedy-Maszak would coincide with Fromm that fear contributes to making decisions by Jessep possesses the ability to demand orders because members of
Stanley Milgram, author of "The Perils of Obedience," conducted an experiment at Yale University to see if average citizens would partake in a study revolving around obedience to authority (Milgram 78). In said experiment, a professor from Yale would give an ordinary individual the authority to shock another person. If the ordinary individual asked to stop, the professor would coax them to continue and remind them they hold no responsibility (78). Not only did Milgram 's study revolve around obedience to authority, it also stressed the point of every person could be capable of torture and doing so without feeling responsible. In the article, "The Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal: Sources of Sadism," author Marianne Szegedy-Maszak states, anyone can
Parker, Ian. “Obedience.” Writing and Reading for ACP Composition. Ed. Thomas E. Leahey and Christine R. Farris. New Jersey: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2009. 230-240. Print.
Fromm explains that humans obey orders because of “fear, hate, and greed”, which, in the end, harms humanity (Fromm 125). Agreeing with this idea, Zimbardo states that “self-aggrandizement” is accomplished by “self-deprecation” of others (Zimbardo 109). Christopher Shea’s experiment also backs up the claim that people act for themselves. Shea would concur with Fromm that humans behave greedily (Shea). In contrast, Shea would not believe that people behave to put others down, which is Zimbardo’s beliefs (Shea). Jessup wished to express his authority by giving orders and allowing himself to advance even higher. Jessup harmed Santiago to advance personally; in addition, Dawson and Downey obeyed orders to gain approval from Jessup. Fromm may argue that Dawson and Downey followed commands due to fear. Zimbardo would believe that they thought completing the order was the correct action to be taken. The article “Human Obedience: The Myth of Blind Conformity” also connects with Zimbardo’s viewpoint. The article explains why people become passive and eventually deem their actions as correct (Human Obedience: The Myth of Blind Conformity). Zimbardo would not consider humans to be passive just blind to the truth. “Human Obedience: The Myth of Blind Conformity” would reply that individuals need to rely on their mind and not listen to commands. Both authors believe the marines’ actions
The world roughly hold about seven billion people. People from different backgrounds, nationality, race, but there is a high percentage of people in this world that struggle to make moral decisions on their own because they are scared of becoming an outcast, an enemy. In addition, this cycle causes people to be controlled by the society and not make decisions that would possibly better them but rather turn them into the society’s robot. In essays such as, “‘Repent Harlequin’ Said the Ticktock Man” and “Shooting an Elephant,” written by Harlan Ellison and George Orwell, respectively, each character faces a conflict with themselves by not using their own moral sense and getting faced with challenges. In the essay “Civil Disobedience,” written
The men of Reserve Police Battalion 101 were just ordinary men, from a variety of backgrounds, education, and age. It would appear that they were not selected by any force other than random chance. Their backgrounds and upbringing, however, did little to prepare these men for the horrors they were to witness and participate in.
In military and every day society, there is always a figure who is more powerful than all the rest. In A Few Good Men, the prominent, intimidating character is Lieutenant Colonel Nathan Jessep. He runs the show at Guantanamo Bay, and is about to be appointed the ...
This experiment is a test to see if people are naturally aggressive. Milgram does not believe that people are naturally aggressive. Although some people think people are naturally aggressive. Ordinary people can be part of a bad course of actions without having any anger toward then victim.
It is only natural to dismiss the idea of our own personal flaws, for who with a healthy sense of self wanders in thoughts of their own insufficiency? The idea of hypocrisy is one that strikes a sensitive nerve to most, and being labeled a hypocrite is something we all strive to avoid. Philip Meyer takes this emotion to the extreme by examining a study done by a social psychologist, Stanley Milgram, involving the effects of discipline. In the essay, "If Hitler Asked You to Electrocute a Stranger, Would You? Probably", Meyer takes a look at Milgram's study that mimics the execution of the Jews (among others) during World War II by placing a series of subjects under similar conditions of stress, authority, and obedience. The main theme of this experiment is giving subjects the impression that they are shocking an individual for incorrectly answering a list of questions, but perhaps more interesting is the results that occur from both ends of the research. Meyer's skill in this essay is using both the logical appeal of facts and statistics as well as the pathetic appeal to emotion to get inside the reader's mind in order to inform and dissuade us about our own unscrupulous actions.
Obedience is when you do something you have been asked or ordered to do by someone in authority. As little kids we are taught to follow the rules of authority, weather it is a positive or negative effect. Stanley Milgram, the author of “The perils of Obedience” writes his experiment about how people follow the direction of an authority figure, and how it could be a threat. On the other hand Diana Baumrind article “Review of Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience,” is about how Milgram’s experiment was inhumane and how it is not valid. While both authors address how people obey an authority figure, Milgram focuses more on how his experiment was successful while Baumrind seems more concerned more with how Milgram’s experiment was flawed and
Martin Luther King and Henry David Thoreau each write exemplary persuasive essays that depict social injustice and discuss civil disobedience, which is the refusal to comply with the law in order to prove a point. In his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” King speaks to a specific audience: the African Americans, and discusses why he feels they should bring an end to segregation. Thoreau on the other hand, in “Civil Disobedience,” speaks to a broader, non-addressed audience as he largely expresses his feelings towards what he feels is an unjust government. Both essays however, focus on the mutual topics of morality and justice and use these topics to inform and motivate their audience to, at times, defy the government in order to establish the necessary justice.
Individuals often yield to conformity when they are forced to discard their individual freedom in order to benefit the larger group. Despite the fact that it is important to obey the authority, obeying the authority can sometimes be hazardous especially when morals and autonomous thought are suppressed to an extent that the other person is harmed. Obedience usually involves doing what a rule or a person tells you to but negative consequences can result from displaying obedience to authority for example; the people who obeyed the orders of Adolph Hitler ended up killing innocent people during the Holocaust. In the same way, Stanley Milgram noted in his article ‘Perils of Obedience’ of how individuals obeyed authority and neglected their conscience reflecting how this can be destructive in experiences of real life. On the contrary, Diana Baumrind pointed out in her article ‘Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience’ that the experiments were not valid hence useless.
Fromm, E. (1963). Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem (Ed.), Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum (pp. 357-361). New York: Pearson.
Necessary Rebellion Erich Fromm is a psychoanalyst and sociologist who has written many books and journals over the years. Fromm closely studied other psychologists such as Freud and Marx, and he published analytical works on both many other theories. In his essay, “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem,” Fromm explains that as humans we start out with disobedience, and make it into something horrible—something for which we must repent, feel sorry for, and act as if we won’t do it again (621). Obedience is thought to be a high moral standard which we are to follow. On the other hand, disobedience is considered a moral flaw, a wrongness, or something you just should not do.