Summary Of The Perils Of Obedience By Stanley Milgram

1022 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: brief over view on the milgram experiment

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 …show more content…

In his article, he provides excerpts from his experiment to solidify his concepts. For example, Gretchen Brandt continuously askes if the "Student" is ok; however, when the "Experimenter" says to continue, she does so but not without saying she "...doesn 't want to be responsible for anything happening to him" (80). Another example Milgram provides is of a man by the name Fred Prozi. Prozi proceeds through the entire experiment. That is, until he runs out of word pairs. At this point the "Experimenter" urges him to continue. Prozi refuses; yet, when the experimenter claims the responsibility is his and his alone, Prozi continues still full of concern (83). Szegedy-Maszak calls this "routinization", one person having responsibility for one job (76). In Milgram 's case the job was having the responsibility for all outcomes, and urging the "Student" to continue. In response to Milgram 's experiment and others, Saul McLeod, psychology tutor at University of Manchester, writes that the person being ordered around believes the authority will accept the responsibility of the end results. He calls this the "agentic state", when people allow others to push them around and direct all responsibility on to them; therefore, acting as agents for the other person (The Milgram Experiment). "Defining Torture" states it clearly when saying, people participate in torturous activities because "...the government of a given territory is ultimately responsible for any torture that occurs within its boundaries" (What Is

Show More
Related

  • The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror” by Crispin Sartwell and Erich Fromm’s Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem

    1278 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal Analysis

    1049 Words  | 3 Pages

    Milgram complies with a follow-up questionnaire of a subject. In the follow-up, the man was appalled by the way he was able to be obedient throughout the experiment and states that his wife referred to him as Eichmann, a WWII Nazi official who maintained an alibi of merely following orders (Milgram 84). Complying with Szegedy-Maszak and Milgram, Robert Hoyk, a doctor of psychology, found similar results in the work office. In his article “Roots of Unethical Behavior,” he found that bosses can direct employees to do unethical actions which the employees morally question. But due to fear of losing their job, the employees perform these acts (Hoyk). Milgram would agree with Hoyk and add that for his experiment, the “experimenter” was simply a man in a lab coat and did not threaten with any form of consequence. How does that relate to Szegedy-Maszak and the Abu Ghraib scandal? In the article “Military Orders: To Obey or Not to Obey?” written by Rod Powers, the oath in which all military personnel must swear to is written. The oath states, “. . . and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice” (Powers). As mentioned by Powers, these recruits are instilled with the practice of obeying immediately and without question (Powers). In fact, if military personnel do not obey their superior officers, it is considered a crime by Articles 90, 91, and 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. According to the same site, such acts are punishable by death (www.usmilitary.about.com). Szegedy-Maszak might conclude that this could be a possible reason as to why those American troops found that they were

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Oy At O Cost By Stanley Milgram

    735 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the research article “OBEY AT ANY COST”, Stanley Milgram conducted a study to examine the concept of obedience and composed disturbing findings. Milgram’s findings on obedience were considered one of the most influential and famous works in the history of psychology. His examination on obedience was that people were possibly capable of doing abuse to other individuals by being demanded to do so. Milgram pertained this to World War II and the inhumanity that has been bolstered and the barbarity. Yet, his hypothesis was that people have the propensity to obey is authoritative which cancels out a person’s capability to act morally, sympathetically, or even ethically. However, Milgram’s theoretical basis for this particular study was that human

    Read More

  • The Perils of Obedience, by Stanley Milgram

    1490 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Stanley Milgram Experiment Summary

    533 Words  | 2 Pages

    Dr. Stanley Milgram conducted a study at Yale University in 1962, in an attempt to understand how individuals will obey directions or commands. This study become known as the Milgram Obedience Study. Stanley Milgram wanted to understand how normal people could become inhumane, cruel, and severely hurt other people when told to carry out an order, in a blind obedience to authority. This curiosity stemmed from the Nazi soldiers in Germany, and how their soldiers could do horrible acts to the Jews. To carry out his study, Dr. Milgram created a machine with an ascending row of switches that were marked with an increasing level of voltage that could be inflicted on another person. Then, he gathered forty random males between the ages of 20 and 50 that lived in the local area. He then told them that this experiment was to see how people learned through pain or punishment rather than without. The teacher volunteer would see the other volunteer or victim put on electronic straps and would not be able to see the person being shocked but could hear them. This setup was fake and the person being shocked had pre-recorded answers and reactions to the ascending row of buttons. The teacher volunteer would ask questions through a headset to the victim volunteer, and whenever a question was answered incorrectly, the teacher would increase the level of

    Read More

  • Milgram Obedience Analysis

    738 Words  | 2 Pages

    In “ Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments On Obedience” by Diana Baumrind, and in “Obedience” by Ian Parker, the writers claim that Milgram’s Obedience is ethically wrong and work of evil because of the potential harm that the subjects of the experiment had. While Baumrind’s article focused only on the Subjects of the experiment, Parker’s article talked about both immediate and long term response to experiment along with the reaction of both the general public and Milgram’s colleagues, he also talks about the effect of the experiment on Milgram himself. Both articles discuss has similar points, they also uses Milgram’s words against him and while Baumrind attacks Milgram, Parker shows the reader that experiment

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast The Perils Of Obedience

    1257 Words  | 3 Pages

    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, in 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

    Read More

  • Summary Of The Stanley Milgram's Obedience

    1310 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Stanley Milgram “Obedience” Study was an experiment conducted at Yale University in 1962 by Milgram, who’s goal was to test the power of obedience to authority. Milgram was in search to understand how the Nazis, who were normal German citizens, could willingly inflict pain onto innocent people. In order to find the answer to this, Milgram decided to perform a research that measured the willingness of an ordinary individual to commit cruel acts on a civilian. The experiment had an intricate set up which involved three participants that all had a different role. There was the “teacher”, “learner”, and “authoritative figure” who was dressed in a lab coat and posed as a scientist. The learner and authoritative figure were actors who were

    Read More

  • The Influence Of Obedience In A Few Good Men

    1024 Words  | 3 Pages

    Obedience is a widely debated topic today with many different standpoints from various brilliant psychologists. Studying obedience is still important today to attempt to understand why atrocities like the Holocaust or the My Lai Massacre happened so society can learn from them and not repeat history. There are many factors that contribute to obedience including situation and authority. The film A Few Good Men, through a military court case, shows how anyone can fall under the influence of authority and become completely obedient to conform to the roles that they have been assigned. A Few Good Men demonstrates how authority figures can control others and influence them into persuading them to perform a task considered immoral or unethical.

    Read More

  • Milgram's The Perils of Obedience

    1275 Words  | 3 Pages

    Milgram answers the question of why this problem occurred in our pasts, for example during the Holocaust, and still occurs within ourselves. The experiment unfortunately illustrates that it is easy to ignore responsibility when one is only a link in a chain of action in a multifaceted society. People feel is their duty or their job to obey an authority figure without realizing that nobody can make another individual do something they feel is not right.

    Read More

  • Analysis of Michael Levin´s Article The Case of Torture

    856 Words  | 2 Pages

    of torture as necessary and important in order to safeguard the lives of the many innocents

    Read More

  • Michael Levin's Essay: The Case For Torture

    948 Words  | 2 Pages

    Who wouldn’t have agreed? Yes, torture is cruel but it is less cruel than the substitute in many positions. Killing Hitler wouldn’t have revived his millions of victims nor would it have ended war. But torture in this predicament is planned to bring no one back but to keep faultless people from being sent off. Of course mass murdering is far more barbaric than torture. The most influential argument against using torture as a penalty or to get an acknowledgment is that such practices ignore the rights of the particulars. Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture” discusses both sides of being with and being against torture. This essay gets readers thinking a lot about the scenarios Levin mentioned that torture is justified. Though using pathos, he doesn’t achieve the argument as well as he should because of the absence of good judgment and reasoning. In addition to emotional appeal, the author tries to make you think twice about your take on

    Read More

  • Analysis of Article If Hitler Asked You To Electrocute A Stranger, Would You? Probably

    1026 Words  | 3 Pages

    At first Milgram believed that the idea of obedience under Hitler during the Third Reich was appalling. He was not satisfied believing that all humans were like this. Instead, he sought to prove that the obedience was in the German gene pool, not the human one. To test this, Milgram staged an artificial laboratory "dungeon" in which ordinary citizens, whom he hired at $4.50 for the experiment, would come down and be required to deliver an electric shock of increasing intensity to another individual for failing to answer a preset list of questions. Meyer describes the object of the experiment "is to find the shock level at which you disobey the experimenter and refuse to pull the switch" (Meyer 241). Here, the author is paving the way into your mind by introducing the idea of reluctance and doubt within the reader. By this point in the essay, one is probably thinking to themselves, "Not me. I wouldn't pull the switch even once." In actuality, the results of the experiment contradict this forerunning belief.

    Read More

  • The Torture Myth, by Anne Applebaum

    897 Words  | 2 Pages

    Applebaum believes that torture should not be used as a means of gaining information from suspects. Applebaum's opinion is supported through details that the practice has not been proven optimally successful. After debating the topic, I have deliberated on agreeing with Applebaum's stance towards the torture policy. I personally agree with the thought to discontinue the practice of torture as a means of acquiring intel. I find it unacceptable that under the Bush Administration, the President decided prisoners to be considered exceptions to the Geneva Convention. As far as moral and ethical consideration, I do not believe that it is anyone's right to harm anyone else, especially if the tactic is not proven successful. After concluding an interview with Academic, Darius Rejali, Applebaum inserted that he had “recently trolled through French archives, found no clear examples of how torture helped the French in Algeria -- and they lost that war anyway.” There are alternative...

    Read More

  • Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience, by Diana Baumrind and Obedience, by Ian Parker

    890 Words  | 2 Pages

    Upon analyzing his experiment, Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, concludes that people will drive to great lengths to obey orders given by a higher authority. The experiment, which included ordinary people delivering “shocks” to an unknown subject, has raised many questions in the psychological world. Diana Baumrind, a psychologist at the University of California and one of Milgram’s colleagues, attacks Milgram’s ethics after he completes his experiment in her review. She deems Milgram as being unethical towards the subjects he uses for testing and claims that his experiment is irrelevant to obedience. In contrast, Ian Parker, a writer for New Yorker and Human Sciences, asserts Milgram’s experiments hold validity in the psychological world. While Baumrind focuses on Milgram’s ethics, Parker concentrates more on the reactions, both immediate and long-term, to his experiments.

    Read More

More about Summary Of The Perils Of Obedience By Stanley Milgram

Open Document