Why Is The Stanley Milgram Experiment Unethical

The prosecution has indicated that my client was tied to the mass murders and killings of jews while under his watch. But there is a legitimate explanation to prove that he is not. People of the jury, the defense will call two witnesses to the stand to prove my client innocence, the first witness is my client is self albert speer and fritz sauckel. Albert speer was an architect that joined the nazi government with excitement and later moved to a higher rank in the nazi goverment. Fritz sauckel was a close friend to speer but also was a german nazi politician.

In 1961, Stanley Milgram (1963) carried out one of the most famous experiments in social psychology. He wanted to examine the conflict between a person’s obedience to authority and their personal conscience. This experiment was conducted one year after the trial of Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Eichmann, along with most of those accused at the Nuremberg War Criminal trials, often based their defense on ”obedience”. The justification for their atrocious actions was that they were simply following orders from their superiors.

Finding Eichmann “When history looks back I want people to know the Nazis weren’t able to kill millions of people and get away with it. ”-Simon Wiesenthal (Simon Wiesenthal "The Nazi Hunter”) Simon Wiesenthal dedicated his life documenting crimes over the holocaust. Simon Wiesenthal may have been a victim of the Nazi brutality in the concentration camps, but when WWII was over Wiesenthal became “A Nazi Hunter” searching for war criminals so justice could be realized. Simon Wiesenthal was born on December 31, 1908 in Buczacz now know as Lvov in Ukraine.

According to Feldman (2013), obedience is the change in conduct as ordered by others. A standout amongst the most celebrated obedience study was done by Stanley Milgram in 1963. He was a psychologist at Yale University. He carried out an experiment concentrating on the altercation personal conscience and obedience towards authority (Milgram, 1963)

I think the father who executed the massacre was similar to Oedipus. This comparison can be proven true using the thematic statement of Ignorance leads to the blindness of knowledge. In both the scenarios the subjects couldn’t see the truth cause it was blocked due to their blindness. The thing that blinded Oedipus was his hubris and the thing that blinded the father was the influence of a terrorist group on

Even though the students were adopting fascism, they were not aware of themselves, and started harassing people who were not part of their group. These ideological motives also made some of the students really attached to the group, such as one dysfunctional student called Tim who was so attached to the group to an extent that he committed suicide when he found out that his teacher wanted to stop the movement. Hezbollah used similar tactics to make people strengthen their beliefs in them. At a time when South of Lebanon was under Israeli occupation, and it seemed almost impossible for them to be driven out of Lebanon, Al-Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah who succeeded Abbas Al Mussawi after Mussawi’s assassination in 1992 convinced men and women of Lebanon that Israel could be defeated in a short period of time. Hezbollah built on an ideology, and identity by being the only party in the Arab world who responded to their follower’s demands such as affordable health care, electricity, and community policing.

Many people may already know who Martin Luther King Jr. is but do they know about his life before he became famous for being a civil rights activist? Martin Luther King Jr. was born on Tuesday, January 15, 1929 in Atlanta Georgia at twelve pm. Martin 's birth name was originally Michael King, but changed his name to honor a world-renowned german reformer of the same name. Martins parents were

Rhetorical Analysis of “A Hanging” In his personal narrative, “A Hanging”, George Orwell, a renowned British author, who often used his talents to criticize injustice and totalitarianism, describes an execution he witnessed in Burma while serving as an officer in the British Imperial Police. Originally published in The Adelphi, a British magazine, in 1931, the piece was written for educated, politically aware people in England, in hopes of provoking questions regarding the morality of capital punishment, and perhaps imperialist society overall, in those benefitting from such a system. Although he died nearly seventy years ago, his works are still influential and relevant today. Using vivid descriptions and a somber tone, Orwell recreates his experience in a tense narration that clearly shows his thesis concerning the value of human life and the wrongness inherent to a system that dismisses it so casually.

In the trenches during the WW1, Hitler talked about and was critical about everybody how they were not deeply committed to the Germ war. Hitler got injured in 1916 in the war and was treated for 2 months at a hospital min Berlin. Hitler said the trauma of defeat made him convinced that the Jews caused it. The defeat of the German war shocked many Germans. The Communist posed violent revolution throughout Germany.

Searle gives this example in his book “an adolescent’s rebellion against school authorities might be accounted for in Freudian terms by his unconscious hatred of his father (symbolically represented as the school authorities)”. The same idea applies to us have you ever meet someone and just could not stand them from the beginning? The person had done nothing to you but whenever they walked into the room you would roll your eyes. Well, unconsciously you could be transferring your feelings of someone else on to this person. At first you usually don’t realize it, and someone else will come along and say “doesn’t she or he remind you of so and so”.

Under the ethical guidelines set by our textbook, this study violated ethical guidelines. It violated the deception ethical standard by hiding the true intent of the study and instead tricked the subjects into believing they were being tested for “bad blood.” It violated the “no harm to participants” tenant because researchers went out of their way to ensure subjects were left unaware and untreated of their condition. Therefor it could also be argued that researchers also violated the “voluntary participation” standard because the subject’s participation was for "bad blood" not for this ulterior

Stanely Milgram composed an experiment to help reveal the murderous acts inflicted by Nazis upon Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, and other diversities. Milgram wanted to show whether individuals would obey power figures, notwithstanding when the instructions given were ethically off-base. My outside source states that "at the time, the Milgram experiment ethnics seemed reasonable, but by the stricter controls in modern psychology, this experiment would not be allowed today (Martyn Shuttleworth). " This experiment seemed to be focused on one question, was human instinct naturally malicious or could sensible individuals be forced by power into unnatural activities?

In the milgram obedience study, volunteers were selected unknowingly to participate in na study in regard to compliance with authority. Participants believed that they had to induce shock on the person on the other side because they were told to do so by a higher authority. If we were to test this experiment out today, I do believe it would play a similar path. I believe that there would be conflict between authority and the participants. Still in today’s society the average person is still follows through with a higher authority figure even if something doesn’t seem right; “if a doctor says its okay, he’s a doctor he knows what he’s talking about.”

Title (psychology #7) In the Abu Ghraib Torture and the Milgram experiment even though they had different reasoning behind it, the same concept is behind it. The obedience to authority people tend to have is either to obey or disobey authority and do what they think is right. In both this situation many people decided to obey authority and break their morals.