A Few Good Men, a film starring the actors Tom Cruise and Demi Moore, depicts the trial of two marines after they follow a specific order which results in the death of a fellow marine. Once again, the topic of blind obedience is revived in this major motion picture. The authors Stanley Milgram, Herbert Kelman, Lee Hamilton, and Philip Zimbardo address their concerns with blind obedience in their articles. Milgram, a former psychologist at Yale University and author of “Perils of Obedience,” conducted a groundbreaking experiment that dealt with the levels of obedience people possessed when orders were established to inflict physical pain on another human (Milgram 77). The article “The My Lai Massacre: A Military Crime of Obedience,” co-authored …show more content…
Their orders, by superior Lt. Johnathan Kendrick, were to conduct disciplinary actions towards Santiago. Dawson and Downey, understanding it was unethical, still follow the order that results in the young man’s death. According to Milgram, the Marines follow Kendrick’s unethical orders to avoid discord and please him (Milgram 88). Milgram witnessed during his own experiment the inability of his subjects to disobey due to the fear that they would seem, “arrogant, untoward and rude” (Milgram 86). In conversation with Milgram, Zimbardo would agree due to the ideas presented in his article, “Why We Conform: The Power of Groups.” He effectively reveals that when people wish to be approved or included, they conform even if their values do not match the choices of the situation (Wang & Zimbardo 258). In regards to Dawson and Downey, following the order is also a path of least resistance. Milgram writes, “relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority,” concerning subjects who became aware that their beliefs did not support the actions they executed (Milgram …show more content…
It was not because they were ordered to act in the manner they did, but rather their behavior was a result of the situation presented. They were told to, “maintain ‘law and order’ in the prison, and that they were responsible for handling any trouble that might break out” (Zimbardo 109). Similarly, Kendrick was just ordered to perform a code red, which signifies an unwritten punishment in the marines, but made sure Santiago received the physical harm that he did. Kendrick pleased Jessup’s wishes and followed through with the order, which steered Dawson and Downey to follow Kendrick’s
Kendrick then punished Dawson for his disobedience by neglecting to promote him and negatively evaluating his fitness evaluation. From this point forward, Dawson had just seen the introduction of the power that Kendrick had over his military experience, one that Kaffee would later recall to be “A lesson he learned after the Curtis Barnes incident.” (A Few…) But, if this order was no different in terms of punishment or in the matter of a soldier simply being disregardful of their marine code, then why was Dawson so reluctant to disobey Kendrick the second time involving Santiago? Not only would Dawson more than likely have to face a much greater consequence for having disobeyed a second time but also Kendrick must have stressed the importance of this order as his leadership was being critically by Jessup.
In "The Perils of Obedience," Stanley Milgram conducted a study that tests the conflict between obedience to authority and one's own conscience. Through the experiments, Milgram discovered that the majority of people would go against their own decisions of right and wrong to appease the requests of an authority figure. The study was set up as a "blind experiment" to capture if and when a person will stop inflicting pain on another as they are explicitly commanded to continue. The participants of this experiment included two willing individuals: a teacher and a learner. The teacher is the real subject and the learner is merely an actor.
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
The Milgram obedience study was an example of the effect that can cause to be in prison/ jail, how officers used their power to abuse inmate, to feel that their in control. As the article mentioned the Department of Correction report that he was injury during the use of force by officer, he suffered a facial contusion. It was also mention in the article that The United State Attorney releases a report denouncing the living condition for adolescent jail on Rikers, However nothing have been done to results those issues.
The motion picture A Few Good Men challenges the question of why Marines obey their superiors’ orders without hesitation. The film illustrates a story about two Marines, Lance Corporal Harold W. Dawson and Private First Class Louden Downey charged for the murder of Private First Class William T. Santiago. Lieutenant Daniel Kaffee, who is known to be lackadaisical and originally considers offering a plea bargain in order to curtail Dawson’s and Downey’s sentence, finds himself fighting for the freedom of the Marines; their argument: they simply followed the orders given for a “Code Red”. The question of why people follow any order given has attracted much speculation from the world of psychology. Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, conducted an experiment in which randomly selected students were asked to deliver “shocks” to an unknown subject when he or she answered a question wrong. In his article, “The Perils of Obedience”, Milgram concludes anyone will follow an order with the proviso that it is given by an authoritative figure. Two more psychologists that have been attracted to the question of obedience are Herbert C. Kelman, a professor at Harvard University, and V. Lee Hamilton, a professor at the University of Maryland. In their piece, Kelman and Hamilton discuss the possibilities of why the soldiers of Charlie Company slaughtered innocent old men, women, and children. The Marines from the film obeyed the ordered “Code Red” because of how they were trained, the circumstances that were presented in Guantanamo Bay, and they were simply performing their job.
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
If a person of authority ordered you inflict a 15 to 400 volt electrical shock on another innocent human being, would you follow your direct orders? That is the question that Stanley Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University tested in the 1960’s. Most people would answer “no,” to imposing pain on innocent human beings but Milgram wanted to go further with his study. Writing and Reading across the Curriculum holds a shortened edition of Stanley Milgram’s “The Perils of Obedience,” where he displays an eye-opening experiment that tests the true obedience of people under authority figures. He observes that most people go against their natural instinct to never harm innocent humans and obey the extreme and dangerous instructions of authority figures. Milgram is well aware of his audience and organization throughout his article, uses quotes directly from his experiment and connects his research with a real world example to make his article as effective as possible.
the guards began mistreating the prisoners, not physically, but emotionally and psychologically, taking advantage of the power and authority appointed to them by the experimenter (Zimbardo 109). Crimes of obedience and mistreatment to other human beings are not only found in Milgrim’s and Zimbardo’s experiments. In 1968, U.S. troops massacred over 500 villagers in My Lai. The incident is described by social psychologist Herbert C. Kelman and sociologist V. Lee Hamilton in the article “The My Lai Massacre: a Crime of Obedience.” Lt. William Calley, charged with 102 killings, claims to have followed orders from his superiors, only accomplishing his duty, which is also a theme throughout the movie, A Few Good Men. After presented with a request from William Santiago, a marine on his base, to be transferred, Jessup refuses. The film depicts, through Colonel Jessup 's authority, the refusal to obey a reasonable request as well as the pride one possesses when fulfilling his duty
Besides, his actions continued to be abusive when Claudio’s sister, Isabella, comes to beg for her brother’s life. He proposes Isabella to sleep with him and only then he would agree not to sentence Claudio to death. In this case, he also uses his authority to gain what he wants, which is obviously an abuse of power. Another example of the abuse of power is in “A Few Good Men.” In the movie two U.S. Marines, Dawson, and Downey, are judged in a court-martial for killing their colleague, Private Santiago and are defended by LT Kaffee with the assistance of Cmdr. Galloway. The defenders are suspicious about the details of the murder and the storyline about Santiago. According to it, Santiago was not respecting commands, requiring to be transferred and his fellow Marines decided to train him into a better Marine. They suspect that the “Code Red,” which is an extrajudicial punishment, was ordered and carried out by two Marines. De facto, “Code Red” was ordered by Colonel Jessep, and LT Kaffee can make him confess it under pressure in the court-martial. Thus, Colonel’s example also shows abusive behavior as he used his power to achieve what he wanted bearing in mind the fact that U.S. Marines could not disobey orders. Therefore, it could be seen that law enforcement does not always mean applying the letter of the law and following the rule
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
The soldiers at My Lai were in an environment conducive to obeying orders. They have been trained to follow the orders of their commanders; respect for authority is weighed heavily upon. It is hard for them to disobey because they have been integrated into the social structure of the military and when in the middle of a war they would have nowhere to turn if they choose to disobey the orders of their commanders. The consequences of disobedience for them could be sent to death. A classic example of the power of authoritative factors is provided by Stanley Milgram’s
In the pursuit of safety, acceptance, and the public good, many atrocities have been committed in places such as Abu Ghraib and My Lai, where simple, generally harmless people became the wiling torturers and murderers of innocent people. Many claim to have just been following orders, which illustrates a disturbing trend in both the modern military and modern societies as a whole; when forced into an obedient mindset, many normal and everyday people can become tools of destruction and sorrow, uncaringly inflicting pain and death upon the innocent.
On March 16th, 1968, an act of obedience resulted in a massacre on the people of My Lai. The men of Charlie Company arrived in Vietnam in December of 1967 with the average age of their company being only 20 years young. These soldiers had no prior combat experience, but had performed well within training and had become known as the best company in their battalion. It was these men who arrived in My Lai on that March day – with orders to kill. It was not only actions on this day that lead to the eventual massacre, but factors played into thee soldiers’ training and experiences leading up to the massacre as well. With a mindset reflecting social psychology, one is able to comprehend how obedience can explain the massacre that occurred My Lai on March 16th, 1968 with the use of four factors;
Ordinary people are willing to go against their own decision of right and wrong to fulfill the request of an authoritative figure, even at the expense of their own moral judgment and sense of what is right and wrong. Using a variety of online resources including The Perils of Obedience by Stanley Milgram this paper attempts to prove this claim.
More specifically, the movie A Few Good Men depicts the results of blindly obeying orders. Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, also explores obedience to authority in his essay “ The Perils of Obedience”. On the other hand, Erich Fromm, a psychoanalyst and philosopher, focused on disobedience to authority in his essay “ Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem.” Milgram wrote about how people were shockingly obedient to authority when they thought they were harming someone else while Fromm dissected both: why people are so prone to obey and how disobedience from authoritative figures can bring beneficial changes for society. Obeying commands, even when they go against our morals, is human nature; Disobeying commands, however, is challenging to do no matter what the situation is.