Unchecked Obedience

1475 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Short summary of milgram's obedience study

Machiavelli declares that whatever you do, be it just or evil, if you know your actions will bring favorable results then you are not responsible for the manner, corrupt or blameless, in which they were obtained. This reasoning defines a timeless question: do the ends really justify the means? R. J. Herrnstein, author of “Measuring Evil”, believes they do, “A small, temporary loss of a few peoples comfort and privacy seems a bearable price for a large reduction in ignorance” (88). But is it not harsh to allow few to be terrorized for the benefit of many? When evaluating the Milgram experiment, summarized in Milgram’s article “The Perils of Obedience”, Diana Baumrind, writer of “Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience”, states that no matter what the “concrete benefit to humanity” is, it cannot “justify the risk that real harm will be done to the subject” (184). Because of these two conflicting points of view it will not be easy to say whether or not the experimenters should be allowed to judge the universal importance of their experiments. Also should we accept findings that resulted from questionable treatment of fellow humans? Although it is hard to sacrifice the possibility of knowledge for the protection of a few, we should refuse to permit anyone to consciously put another in harms way.

Stanley Milgram designed an experiment to determine the extent of obedience in the average American. The subject was given false pretences about what the experiment was really designed to do and then asked to “shock” a fellow “subject”. The actual subject didn’t realize that he was not actually shocking the pretend “subject” but being tested on his willingness to harm another person with a prodding authority figure as...

... middle of paper ...

... rights, the harm to one person without their consent ruins any chance for justice and righteousness. If the gains are truly as big a necessity as many believe their cause to be, then someone will willingly sacrifice for the gain of many.

Unchecked obedience to authority can be dangerous because it relies too much on the good intentions of one person, but without obedience society would crumble. Obedience should not be mindless, but instead a conscious willing desire to contribute to the bettering of society. Figures of authority have many methods in which they think they can force obedience, but then it wouldn’t be true obedience. Obedience without a choice is slavery. When you disobey, do it not out of pure rebellion but out of obedience to something greater. It takes more to stand out and stand up than it does to accept.

Show More
Related

  • An Experiment on Obedience in The Pearl´s of Obedience by Stanley Milgram

    638 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Summary Of The Perils Of Obedience By Stanley Milgram

    1022 Words  | 3 Pages

    Many people believe they could never commit the crime of torture; yet, Milgram, along with many others, have discovered that the converse is true. At the beginning of his piloted experiment, Milgram predicted virtually all the participants would refuse to continue. He was proven wrong when twenty-five out of forty participants continued past the point of 150 volts (80). He surmised, as the experiment progressed from the piloted study to the regular series, the total out come of average persons response was the same as they had observed in the prior study--solidifying the thought even your "average Joe" is capable of torture (81). While Milgram supports this legitimate thought with facts, stories, and examples, news and world reporter Szegedy-Maszak simply states "...Everyman is a potential torturer"(76). In correspondence with both Milgram and

    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

  • Analyzing Stanley Milgram's Obedience Experiment

    1077 Words  | 3 Pages

    A former Yale psychologist, Stanley Milgram, administered an experiment to test the obedience of "ordinary" people as explained in his article, "The Perils of Obedience". An unexpected outcome came from this experiment by watching the teacher administer shocks to the learner for not remembering sets of words. By executing greater shocks for every wrong answer created tremendous stress and a low comfort levels within the "teacher", the one being observed unknowingly, uncomfortable and feel the need to stop. However, with Milgram having the experimenter insisting that they must continue for the experiments purpose, many continued to shock the learner with much higher voltages.The participants were unaware of many objects of the experiment until

    Read More

  • The Perils of Obedience, by Stanley Milgram

    1490 Words  | 3 Pages

    If a person of authority ordered you to 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.

    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 Opening Skinner's Box By Lauren Slater

    618 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Lauren Slater’s book Opening Skinner’s Box, the second chapter “Obscura” discusses Stanley Milgram, one of the most influential social psychologists. Milgram created an experiment which would show just how far one would go when obeying instructions from an authoritative figure, even if it meant harming another person while doing so. The purpose of this experiment was to find justifications for what the Nazi’s did during the Holocaust. However, the experiment showed much more than the sociological reasoning behind the acts of genocide. It showed just how much we humans are capable of.

    Read More

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

    1026 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Shirley Jackson's Views Of Obedience And Violence To The Lottery

    1485 Words  | 3 Pages

    Through my research and findings of obedience to authority this ancient dilemma is somewhat confusing but needs understanding. Problem with obedience to authority has raised a question to why people obey or disobey and if there are any right time to obey or not to obey. Through observation of many standpoints on obedience and disobedience to authority, and determined through detailed examination conducted by Milgram “The Perils Of Obedience,” Doris Lessing “Group Minds” and Shirley Jackson “The Lottery”. We have to examine this information in hopes of understanding or at least be able to draw our own theories that can be supported and proven on this subject.

    Read More

  • Just Do What the Pilot Tells You

    744 Words  | 2 Pages

    Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience are the focus of Theodore Dalrymple and Ian Parker. Theodore Dalrymple is a British physician that composed his views of the Milgram experiment with “Just Do What the Pilot Tells You” in the New Statesman in July 1999 (254). He distinguishes between blind obedience and blind disobedience stating that an extreme of either is not good, and that a healthy balance between the two is needed. On the other hand, Ian Parker is a British writer who wrote “Obedience” for an issue of Granta in the fall of 2000. He discusses the location of the experiment as a major factor and how the experiment progresses to prevent more outcomes. Dalrymple uses real-life events to convey his argument while Parker exemplifies logic from professors to state his point.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Stanley Milgram's Behavioral Study Of Obedience

    1241 Words  | 3 Pages

    It is human nature to respect and obey elders or authoritative figures, even when it may result in harm to oneself or others. Stanley Milgram, an American social psychologist, conducted an experiment to test the reasoning behind a person’s obedience. He uses this experiment in hope to gain a better understanding behind the reason Hitler was so successful in manipulating the Germans along with why their obedience continued on such extreme levels. Milgram conducts a strategy similar to Hitler’s in attempt to test ones obedience. Diana Baumrind, a clinical and developmental psychologist, disagreed with Milgram’s experiment in her article, ”Some Thoughts on Ethics of Research: After Reading Milgram’s “Behavioral Study of obedience”, Baumrind explains

    Read More

  • Blindly Obeying Authority

    1789 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    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

  • Obedience To Authority In The Lottery

    1233 Words  | 3 Pages

    The limits of obedience to authority is an overall good idea and. In the short story, “The Lottery,” by Shirley Jackson, supports the thought that blind obedience will only lead to bad things. Authority does not have to be a person; it can be an item or belief. Obedience to authority can lead to the destruction of that group and groups should never blindly follow anything, especially when they feel as if it is wrong. Obedience should be regulated and only occur when the demand of authority is rational and reasonable.

    Read More

  • Obedience to Authority

    1815 Words  | 4 Pages

    Authority cannot exist without obedience. Society is built on this small, but important concept. Without authority and its required obedience, there would only be anarchy and chaos. But how much is too much, or too little? There is a fine line between following blindly and irrational refusal to obey those in a meaningful position of authority. Obedience to authority is a real and powerful force that should be understood and respected in order to handle each situation in the best possible manner.

    Read More

More about Unchecked Obedience

Open Document