A Consideration of the Ends Justifying the Means of Milgram’s Research Into Obedience Stanley Milgram carried out a series of studies in 1963 and 1973 related to obedience to authority. These studies have been viewed as controversial ever since, mainly because of the ethical issues they raise. Although he was able to obtain conclusive results and discover that under certain situational influences anybody might obey orders that went against their conscience; the way in which he carried out his studies was arguably unethical and contributed to the BPS Ethical Principles. What are the implications of this study? * That at that time, people were very willing to follow the commands of an authority figure even if that meant harming another person. This did not occur in a time of crisis or war, but in an apparently everyday psychological experiment. * This research suggests that ordinary people can be instructed to carry out atrocities and they will be likely to follow those instructions, provided that they are given by a legitimate authority figure. This might suggest that the acts of genocide we have witnesses through history may be part of human social behaviour. Perhaps we should be teaching people to challenge authority where they are placed in such a situation. * The study also has implications for organisations, which require obedience, such as the military. The research implies that leaders should be seen as legitimate authority figures, and that they should position themselves as close to their soldiers as possible, with support from other compliant soldiers. ... ... middle of paper ... ... do have evidence on how people obey and conform. Milgram’s work showed the level of punishment on learning. Proposed that a person obeys when they “comply with authority”. His subjects were led to believe that the experiment was investigating the effects of punishment on learning. He obtained a level of obedience of 65% of the subjects continued to the maximum shock level of 450 volts. None of the subjects stopped before 300 volts. It is valuable because Milgram’s findings suggest that significant numbers of ordinary people were prepared to obey orders that could do others serious harm. Milgram discovered that different types of people have different obedience rates. Participants with a military background tended to be more obedient, and participants who had gone onto higher education were less obedient.
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.
In this article “The Pearls of Obedience”, Stanley Milgram asserts that obedience to authority is a common response for many people in today’s society, often diminishing an individuals beliefs or ideals. Stanley Milgram designs an experiment to understand how strong a person’s tendency to obey authority is, even though it is amoral or destructive. Stanley Milgram bases his experiment on three people: a learner, teacher, and experimenter. The experimenter is simply an overseer of the experiment, and is concerned with the outcome of punishing the learner. The teacher, who is the subject of the experiment, is made to believe the electrical shocks are real; he is responsible for obeying the experimenter and punishing the learner for incorrect answers by electrocuting him from an electric shock panel that increases from 15 to 450 volts.
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
In a series of experiments conducted from 1960 to 1963, American psychologist Stanley Milgram, sought to examine the relationship between obedience and authority in order to understand how Nazi doctors were able to carry out experiments on prisoners during WWII. While there are several theories about Milgram’s results, philosopher Ruwen Ogien uses the experiment as grounds for criticizing virtue ethics as a moral theory. In chapter 9 of Human Kindness and The Smell of Warm Croissant, Ogien claims that “what determines behavior is not character but other factors tied to situation” (Ogien 120). The purpose of this essay is not to interpret the results of the Milgram experiments. Instead this essay serves to argue why I am not persuaded by Ogien’s
Comparative Analysis Obedience to authority and willingness to obey an authority against one’s morals has been a topic of debate for decades. Stanley Milgrim, a Yale psychologist, conducted a study in which his subjects were commanded by a person in authority to initiate lethal shocks to a learner; his experiment is discussed in detail in the article “The Perils of Obedience” (Milgrim 77). Milgrim’s studies are said to be the most “influential and controversial studies of modern psychology” (Levine). While the leaner did not actually receive fatal shocks, an actor pretended to be in extreme pain, and 60 percent of the subjects were fully obedient, despite evidence displaying they believed what they were doing was harming another human being (Milgrim 80). Likewise, Dr. Zimbardo, a professor of psychology at Stanford University, conducted an experiment, explained in his article “The Stanford Prison Experiment,” in which ten guards were required to keep the prisoners from escape and under control.
“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.
...test, it is hard not to draw some parallels. Milgram noticed that if people did not have direct contact with the people they were inflicting pain on, two-thirds of the subjects inflicted what was considered extreme pain. If they had visual and voice feedback, only forty percent obeyed orders. The number fell to thirty percent if they were in direct contact with the person they were shocking. Browning also points out that the social pressures of conformity were quite apparent. "Within virtually every social collective, the peer group exerts tremendous pressures on behavior and sets the moral norms. If the men of Reserve Police Battalion 101 could become killers under such circumstances, what group of men cannot?" (Browning, 189) In closing, these men, who appeared to be quite ordinary, became extraordinary in their brutality and killing, no matter what the reason. Decidedly, their contribution to the genocide was quite significant. It is a shame that many received little, or no punishment for the slaughter they participated in.
When you realize the themes of the outsiders… The outsiders is about two gangs that dislike each other. The one night someone takes things too far to save his best friend…
Everybody wants to be accepted, yet society is not so forgiving. It bends you and changes you until you are like everyone else. Society depends on conformity and it forces it upon people. In Emerson's Self Reliance, he says "Society is a joint stock company, in which the members agree, for the better securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater." People are willing to sacrifice their own hopes and freedoms just to get the bread to survive. Although the society that we are living in is different than the one the Emerson's essay, the idea of fitting in still exists today. Although society and our minds make us think a certain way, we should always trust our better judgment instead of just conforming to society.
Milgram’s studies on obedience to authority as well as obedience under extreme stress, paved a way to understanding the human psyche and how we handle choices we do not understand. As human beings we are given from a very young age a set of morals and standards we choose to live by. We see our parent’s successes and failures and we base the choices we make on what made them happy, and what will in the long run, bring us the same joy. From the beginning of the experiment you can see the pressure he starts everyone under. Where he chooses to begin his testing tells you a lot about what he was wanting them all to feel. A very rundown, dark, empty building with prison cell like rooms with sparse walls. Pipes showing and most likely a musty smell
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.
Obedience may be a simple word, yet it has a powerful impact on the daily lives of millions. Obedience is simply when one follows the orders or directions of another figure, presumably in an authoritative position. This is something nearly everyone bows to everyday without even realizing it - and it can drastically change our lives as we know it. Obedience is, for example, how the holocaust happened. The Germans were ordinary people turned into murderers because they followed the orders of one man - their dictator, Adolf Hitler. Of course, obedience does not always result in horrid results such as the holocaust or result in such a large catastrophe. Obedience can have drastic effects on the lives of only a few men as well; this is showcased in the movie A Few Good Men.
Lot of people do not have ability to disobey the authority. In Milgram’s experiment, we can see that few people were nervous to give high voltage shocks. Despite, their nervousness and morality they listened to the authority to continue long after even though the learner was not responding. Perhaps the teachers obeyed because they have a sense of obligation to their duty. This is just the whole idea of completing the job that’s given to you. Some people have a fear of being perceived as rude. In general, people want to present themselves in a best way possible, hence people obey authority despite of ethical notion in the back of their minds. If there was not a society wide stereotype of scientists, I would suppose that the teachers would had
Introduction 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 real life experiences. 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.
By definition, obedience is “dutiful or submissive compliance” according to dictionary.com. Not only that though, but the first example of the word obedience on this site appeared in a sentence pertaining to military service. There is so much more to obedience though. I believe obedience does not relate solely to the aspect of submitting but to the grey areas that surround as well. Submit, defy, the authority itself, and the consequences that follow obedience are not always read between the lines of the exact definition. Maybe it should display the following definition: obedience is the act of giving in to an authoritative command that may not always reap joyful or beneficial consequences. Military commands sometimes consist of dropping bombs on cities containing civilians, assassinating enemy soldiers, and fighting over seas away from their families. I believe it is important to know that obeying and trusting authority does not always mean success or a desired outcome. Obedience is a key factor in the movie A Few Good Men, which displays many characters under military command. Rob Reiner presents Lt. Colonel Markinson as powerless based on situational influences.