More handpicked essays just for you.
Evaluate of stanford prisons experiments
Stanford prison experiment outline
The Stanford Prison Experiment summary
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Many war-criminals claimed that they were merely following orders and could not be held responsible for their actions, in the trials following the World War II. The United States Military discipline and effectiveness is built on the foundation of obedience to orders. Recruits are taught to obey, immediately and without question, orders from their superiors. One movie that challenges the question of why marines obey their supervisors’ orders without ambivalent is Rob Reiner’s motion picture, A Few Good Men.
In A Few Good Men, two marines are put on trial for the death of a member of their squad, which they simply followed the orders given for a “Code Red”. Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist conducted one of the classic studies on obedience during 1960s that
…show more content…
Dawson and Downey are cleared of the charge, but are given a dishonorable discharge from the marines. When Downey asked what did he do wrong, Dawson simply stated, “Yeah we did. We were supposed to fight for people who couldn’t fight for themselves. We were supposed to fight for Willy.” It’s clear, under military law, that military members can be held accountable for crimes committed under the guise of “obeying orders,” and there is no requirement to obey orders which are unlawful.
During the Stanley Milgram Experiment, many subjects were uncomfortable doing the shock, all 40 subjects obeyed up to 300 volts. If the subject asked who was responsible if anything happen to the learner, the experimenter answered “I am responsible”. This gave the subjects a relief and many continued, and making it more authoritarian for each time the subject contacted the experimenter. Zimbardo, on the other hand, believes that social and ideological factors determined how both guards and prisoners behaved, with individuals acting in a way that they thought was required, rather than using their own
Accountability is a subject that ranges through every spectrum of life. From simply knowing your food supply by opening the refrigerator, to knowing the exact amount of ammunition a military convoy has at its disposal, down to each individual round. When we know what the situation is, and hold each person responsible for they're actions in the situation, that is the concept of accountability at its root. If we are not to hold each other responsible for each of our own actions and choices then we will never be able to correct problems and concerns, which will make us fail as a whole because the smallest individual action can account for the gravest of concequences. In this essay I'm going to show how important accountability is in the everyday life of a United States Marine. I will do this by presenting the textbook definition of accountability then dissecting it and defining it in my own words. I will then show you how the military practices accountability with everything it does; by applying a system that is similiar to that of checks and balances. I will tie into this the Incident that occurd in 29 Palms, CA on August 31, 1988, where the failure to have accountability of all the marines on Base ultimately resulted in the negligent death of one Marine, and the ruined careers of those who were in charge of him. Lastly I will go down to the basic level of the Marine Corps: the life of the individual Marine and how he can, and naturally does to a point, apply accountability to his every action, be it on or off duty.
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.
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.
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
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.
Fromm explains that humans obey orders because of “fear, hate, and greed”, which, in the end, harms humanity (Fromm 125). Agreeing with this idea, Zimbardo states that “self-aggrandizement” is accomplished by “self-deprecation” of others (Zimbardo 109). Christopher Shea’s experiment also backs up the claim that people act for themselves. Shea would concur with Fromm that humans behave greedily (Shea). In contrast, Shea would not believe that people behave to put others down, which is Zimbardo’s beliefs (Shea). Jessup wished to express his authority by giving orders and allowing himself to advance even higher. Jessup harmed Santiago to advance personally; in addition, Dawson and Downey obeyed orders to gain approval from Jessup. Fromm may argue that Dawson and Downey followed commands due to fear. Zimbardo would believe that they thought completing the order was the correct action to be taken. The article “Human Obedience: The Myth of Blind Conformity” also connects with Zimbardo’s viewpoint. The article explains why people become passive and eventually deem their actions as correct (Human Obedience: The Myth of Blind Conformity). Zimbardo would not consider humans to be passive just blind to the truth. “Human Obedience: The Myth of Blind Conformity” would reply that individuals need to rely on their mind and not listen to commands. Both authors believe the marines’ actions
In A Tactical Ethic, Moral Conduct in the Insurgent Battlespace, author Dick Couch addresses what he believes to be an underlying problem, most typical of small units, of wanton ethical and moral behavior partly stemming from the negative “ethical climate and moral culture” of today’s America (Couch, D., 2010, p. 15). In chapter one, he reveals what A Tactical Ethic will hope to accomplish; that is identify the current ethics of today’s military warriors, highlight what is lacking, and make suggestions about what can be done to make better the ethical behavior of those on the battlefield and in garrison. He touches on some historic anecdotes to highlight the need for high ethics amongst today’s military warriors as well as briefly mentions
...e maximum shock level dropped significantly. The more official the experimenter looked, the more people would reach the maximum shock level. Stanley Milgram’s findings were groundbreaking. He found that humans will comply and obey ones orders than previously thought. His experiment has become one of the more well known and influential social psychology experiments completed.
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
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.
The Marine Corps Values exemplify Honor, Courage, and Commitment in a service member 's character. Honor details expectations of one’s ethical and moral conduct, Courage focuses on honor in action, and Commitment deals with total dedication to the Marine Corps and the country. If one fails to maintain the Marine Corps values they face disciplinary action and the possibility of a dishonorable discharge, depending on the nature of their actions. The honor values of the Marine Corps Values place one 's personal life, as well as their action in service, under scrutiny. Lieutenant Colonel Shane Tomko was dishonorably discharged and stripped of all Service Medals and Awards on February 12th, 2015 due to actions in his personal life. Lieutenant Tomko had an affair, which breaks the Honor Code’s clause that states “A U.S. Marine must never lie, never cheat, never steal. . . Each Marine must cling to an uncompromising code of personal integrity. . . And, above all, honor mandates that a Marine never sully the reputation of his Corps.” A spokesman for the Marine Corps, Major Dolan, made a statement that the actions taken against Lieutenant Tomko were “due to a loss of confidence in his leadership” (Marine Corps Times). The affair was seen as such a dishonor on the Marine Corps as a whole and on Lieutenant Tomko’s service as an individual that he was stripped of all of the accomplishments and
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.
Benjamin Jr. Ludy T. & Simpson, Jeffrey A. The Power of the Situation: The Impact of Milgram’s Obedience Studies on Personality and Social Psychology. From American Psychologist. Vol. 64 (1), pp.12-18, 2009.
An officer in the military will listen to the officers ranking higher than him more readily than someone of a lower rank. It does not matter whether the rank is by a title such as in a military situation or in the way someone is perceived to be, like in Zimbardo and Milgram’s experiments. In the film A Few Good Men there is one puzzling statement near the end of the movie said by Private Louden Downey. After the sentencing Downey loudly questions Lieutenant Commanders Galloway and Kaffee as to why Dawson and Downey were still found guilty of “conduct unbecoming of United States marines”. He said “what did we do wrong? We did nothing wrong!” Private Downey was referring to the fact that he is a marine, he gets an order and he follows it, with no questions asked. The puzzling idea that those following orders because it was an order given by someone of a higher rank means that Dawson and Downey are not responsible for their actions. Is anyone responsible for their actions and the consequences of those actions if they were “just following orders?” The ability to tell someone what to do and to have them listen to your command is determined by your status relative to theirs.
LM01, Ethical Leadership. (2012). Maxwell Gunter AFB. Thomas N. Barnes Center for Enlisted Education (AETC)