Summary Of Stanley Milgram's Obedience Experiments

1187 Words3 Pages

On numerous accounts, Stanley Milgram’s obedience experiments have proven to be unethical and incomparable to authentic examples of obedience (Baumrind 90; Parker 98-100). So persuade authors Ian Parker and Diana Baumrind in their respective articles, “Obedience” and “Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on obedience.” In “Obedience,” Parker reasons via multiple scenarios that the trials conducted by Milgram do not provide a realistic presentation of the scenarios in which people will obey or disobey (101). Utilizing arguments such as the fact that the subjects might not have fully believed in the legitimacy of the shock machine used by Milgram and that the experiment merely compares what is expected to happen with what actually happened …show more content…

Baumrind’s article begins by assessing the fallacies in the results of the experiment and continues to present an extensive examination of the ethical complications of the trials (90). She quotes Milgram many times throughout the article and offers arguments to his methodology and morals (90-93). Although in some cases Baumrind ineffectively attempts to use the ethical issues to discredit the legitimacy of Milgram’s experiments, Parker effectively and extensively analyzes the applicability of the trials with numerous credible outside sources, and both articles effectively prompt readers to reassess both the legitimacy and morality of Milgram’s …show more content…

Parker focuses the majority of his writing on answering the question of whether or not the experiment uncovers any new information regarding obedience (100). Obstinately providing her opinion on this matter, Baumrind states in the beginning of her article that she believes that obedience and suggestibility cannot be realistically studied in a laboratory due to the anxiety in the environment (90). Supporting Baumrind’s opinionated claim, however, Parker effectively prompts readers to reconsider their views by describing a specific supporting scenario in which one of the subjects expresses that throughout the experiment he or she could not believe that Yale would conduct such a dangerous experiment (101). Parker logically interprets that subjects with similar suspicions as this one likely continued to obey the orders despite their disbelief due to the laboratory setting, suggesting that in the real world the consequences of violent actions are more obvious than in a test and that the experiment cannot be fully applied when studying obedience under authentic circumstances (101). Agreeing with Parker, Gina Perry, a psychologist and published author, describes the importance of the subjects’ belief in the validity of the shock machine in her article, “The Shocking Truth of the Notorious Milgram Obedience Experiments.” Perry

In this essay, the author

  • Explains that stanley milgram's obedience experiments have proved unethical and incomparable to authentic examples of obedience. parker and baumrind analyze the applicability of the trials with credible outside sources.
  • Analyzes how baumrind logically suggests that milgram violated these expectations and that the subjects were manipulated and embarrassed. brannigan uncovers the truth by citing eight specific scenarios in which the subject recalled being highly traumatized or encountering severe shakiness.
Show More
Open Document