I submit to power when it’s easier than resisting. If I don’t feel inconvenienced by the power that is being pushed on me, I find it easier to not fight back because the effort of resisting would not be worth the outcome. I adopted this mindset during the time when rules were being enforced by my parents. Throughout my life my parents have enacted many rules for my brother and I, from eat your vegetables, bedtime at 9:00, get good grades. Having been repeated for years, these mantras have been ingrained into my mind. But this influence has not come easily, because rules have always been accompanied by punishments. Spankings, revoking of privileges, or forcing more vegetables have all been popular sources of my childhood misery for doing …show more content…
Similar to him, I despise it when something is unfair to me, but if I am not the one being inconvenienced, I find it not worth it to resist power. The first time I read through this part of the book, I admired Bernard for rising above the dystopian world; he was the first character that was aware of the flaws in the conditioned society. Unfortunately, this realization didn’t last long. We see by the end that Bernard exploits John for the fame and attention, meaning that he has not learned to resist power, but played it to his advantage. I don’t believe that I outwardly resist very often, rather I play by the option that most benefits me in the present …show more content…
Parents with an authoritarian style have very high expectations of their children, yet provide very little in the way of feedback and nurturance” (Cherry). Essentially, it’s a ‘do what I say because I said so’ mindset. Throughout my childhood, there was never any negotiation; it was just if I did something slightly out of line, I would be punished. I had to eat my vegetables until I gagged; I wasn’t allowed to talk back or else my dad would hit me on the back of my hands with a ruler; They would take my phone and read through all of my texts and apps to make sure I wasn’t hiding anything from them even though I did nothing initially to warrant it. In Discipline and Punish, it explains how the panoptic schema can be used in any situation of power, and I believe this has been the way my parents’ have inflicted “a particular form of behaviour” on me (Foucault). Through their policing, I have become less likely to resist regardless of whether or not I had something to hide in the first place.
I believe that’s why I have the reservations about resisting power that I do; so many times in my life by my parents I’ve been scolded and told no. Just like Bernard when he couldn’t convince John to come out to the dinner, “slink back, diminished, to his room and inform the impatient assembly that the Savage would not be appearing that evening” (173). Bernard
Silence is a major part of keeping a regime afloat and the key action to destroying that power is to defy it. In the article, "Resistance to Authority'' by Michael Schrekiner, Schrekiner brings forth a very important detail in the balance of people and their autocratic leaders. " Those in power view obedience as a virtue and disobedience as a vise since obedience is absolutely essential for maintaining that power.'' Once a successful resistance occurs, the silence dims to a roar of anger fueled by the received cruel treatment.
In Stanley Milgram’s “The perils of obedience” and Philip G. Zimbardo's “The Stanford Prison Experiment” the influence that authority holds is analyzed and tested in a variety of social experiments. Milgram asserts that any individual can excuse themselves from the responsibility of their role, regardless of how evil, on the grounds that there is someone ordering them to do so. However, Zimbardo claims that authority doesn’t have to be an individual, stating that anyone, be it a prison guard or a prisoner, will ultimately fill and perpetuate their assigned role as a result of authoritative factors and environments. However, the way in which both of the authors go to reaching these conclusions differs greatly.
Renowned psychologist and social experimenter Stanley Milgram once said that “obedience is the psychological mechanism that links individual action to political purpose. It is the dispositional cement that binds men to systems of authority.” In other words, man succumbs to authority because it is rooted in his obedience to jurisdiction. An example of this is the American judicial system, which man is obedient to because that is what’s known. His political or societal purpose however is a learned behavior, or one that he matriculates from the dynamic of his culture.
The decisions that one makes may not always reflect one's personal beliefs. Oftentimes, many external factors lead one to make a choice that they do not agree with. This leads to the moral dilemma of when to obey a higher authority, and when to disobey. In his essay, “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem”, Erich Fromm, a psychoanalyst and philosopher, dissects both internal and external forces that drive a person to make decisions. It is important for one to become aware of these forces so they can determine the best way to respond to a situation.
But the power still resides in the obedience, not in the prison or the guns. Now, what happens if those people begin to say, “We’re not afraid of prison. We’re even willing to die. But we’re not willing to obey you any longer.”
Since the beginning of the human existence, man has always dominated and ruled over one another be it empires, corporations, or small groups. Authority and obedience has always been a factor of who we are. This natural occurrence can be seen clearly through the psychological experiments known as The Milgram Experiment and the Stanford Prison Experiment. Both of these studies are based on how human beings react to authority figures and what their obedience is when faced with conflict.
Children who grow up with permissive parents tend to struggle academically and they may even exhibit behavioral problems for the reason that they will most likely not appreciate authority and
Adaptation of Fahrenheit 451 to an argumentative essay Adapted by Emre Atatanır TR 111.01 People have struggled for power since they have started to live in groups. First, they came together, establish a system that would work, and then try to keep it stable. When they try to do that, sometimes they may think that the ends justify the means and they cut across all boundaries that block them. Therefore, to control the society, a ruler wants his subjects to follow him whether his decisions are correct or not and to do so he would try every plausible option.
They demanded ever greater obedience from the prisoners.” . Having power isn’t always a good thing. Having power can turn a person from good to bad. Having can make you not be aware of how you are treating people. Having power really corrupts you.
Baurmind (1991) highlighted that authoritarian parents tend to be demanding and directive but are not responsive enough to their children’s needs. They tend to exercise authority and control by demanding unquestioning obedience. They often fail to explain the reasoning for the rules. Thus, children might feel detached as the parents express little warmth, discourage verbal give-and-take and demand adherence to high standards. Miller (2010) conjectured that children who grow up under authoritarian parenting styles often experience long term emotional consequences.
Voluminous research has been conducted in the area of obedience, more specifically how obedient individuals will be in obeying an authority figure even if the authority figure is commanding them to inflict harm or pain onto others. Ordinary people, for many years have inflicted pain onto others under the commands of an authority figure such as during the Holocaust. Probably, the most famous psychological piece of research investigating obedience was that of Milgram (1963). Milgram recruited ordinary males from different backgrounds and occupations, he then created a scenario where the participants were required to follow instructions from a perceived authority figure.
Conclusion : It is difficult for an individual to disobey an authority figure or not comply with the morality of the group or society because they are afraid of the consequences they will face from the authority or the power that is above them. In addition, humans are so programmed by authority and the government to obey in order to avoid the punishment that people don 't even give any thought to disobey. Support 1 : Foremost of all, people do not have enough courage to disobey. Fromm said that disobedience is "the first step into independence and freedom”. He means that disobedience sets individuals free and opens their eyes.
The idea that those who participate in these “everyday forms of resistance”, choose not to bring attention to themselves is also reinforced multiple times throughout the text. All these examples bring along questions that need to be answered: Where does power lie? Is this power narrowly or widely distributed? And, is power about formal political institutions or does it reside somewhere else?
Unlike my father, my mother is very strict. When I was a teenager, my mother would punish me for simple mistakes. I remember her spanking my brothers and me for not cleaning the dishes well. One the other hand my father do not believe in spanking children. As a child, I loved going to my father’s house for the weekend; he would let me get away with being disobedient.
Our sources of power are not the same as our uses of power. Regardless of from where our power derives, we have a choice about how to apply it” -(Mayer, 2012 Pg. 82) Mayer, in chapter three, discusses the many sources of power and how power can be used. He states that one has the ability to choose how they will use their power. Power used and how we obtain that power are different.