In the wake of Adolf Eichmann’s prosecution for commanding the slaying of over 1 million Jews, Psychologist Stanley Milgram called the role of authority into question. What would propel such evil acts from a seemingly normal man? In spite of what top psychologists assumed the outcome would be, the results were astounding. Despite the deep rooted convictions of the subjects opposed to causing physical harm to others, obedience to authority overcame the majority of the time (The Perils of Obedience by Stanley Milgram)
According to Milgram in his famous writing, The Perils of Obedience,
“Even Eichmann was sickened when he toured the concentration camps, but had only to sit at a desk and shuffle papers.”
Stanley Milgram desired to see beyond the man at the
…show more content…
They are proud of doing a good job, obeying the experimenter under difficult circumstances. “(The Perils of Obedience by Stanley Milgram)
Milgram did the experiment in 18 different settings to see if there was any change to the outcome. He changed the setting from the laboratory at Yale University and moved it to a bleak basement. The results showed that people were less inclined to obey if the setting of the experiment did not look professional. Another variation he tried was having the experimenter push the switch instead of the teacher, and the obedience rose from 65% to a notable 92.5%. This suggests that the more a person enters into an agentic state, the less responsibility they feel for the situation.
Milgram’s experiments continue to beg the question of the power of conscience and will over the power of obedience. Are humans more inclined to obey authority even if it causes harm to others? As we have seen through the scope of this experiment, even when an individual has deep rooted convictions, obedience to authority still overcomes the majority of the
In A Few Good Men, director Rob Reiner portrays the court case of two Marines named Dawson and Downey, on trial for the murder of another Marine, William Santiago. Santiago was killed due to a code red ordered by Kendrick and Jessep. Dawson and Downey felt that they are innocent because they were just following orders. The same situation arises in “The Perils of Obedience,” by Stanley Milgram. Milgram believes that everyone is inclined to be obedient but not hold responsibility, and proves this by including an experiment where while administering shocks to learners, teachers would only continue when being told to do so and when they were told that they are not responsible for what happens to the learner.
This Milgram research on respect to authority figures was a series of cultural science experiments conducted by Yale University scientist Stanley Milgram in 1961. They assessed the willingness of survey participants, men from a different variety of jobs with varying degrees of training, to obey the authority figure who taught them to do acts conflicting with their personal conscience. Participants were led to think that they were helping an unrelated research, in which they had to distribute electrical shocks to the individual. These fake electrical shocks gradually increased to grades that could have been deadly had they been true. McLeod's article about the Milgram experiment exposed the fact that a high percentage of ordinary people will
(What does the study add to our understanding of the phenomenon?) People are much more likely to obey someone of authority than expected, even if it is against their beliefs or morals. Something such as Hitler’s rise to power could have been just as possible in the United States because Americans are just as likely as the Germans to continue to do something that they know is
Deception from a moral viewpoint would be something that is seen as wrong, but in a study or experiment for research I think deception is something that is necessary to gain certain knowledge that we wouldn 't be able to gain using regular methods. Usually, the ends justify the means to a deceptive experiments and they usually have good intentions behind them. Many people may be angry after the experiment is over but it is shown that people enjoy an experiment with deception more than an experiment without deception; and people also benefit from them more, educationally. I believe deception is a necessary tool for learning about human behavior and human reaction. Deceptive experiments are experiments that really make you think when the experiment
Decades after the atrocities committed during the Holocaust, people are still baffled by the fact that approximately eleven million people were killed in Nazi Germany following the orders of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi regime (Niewyk & Nicosia, 2000). How is it possible that approximately 500,000 people participated in planning and executing eleven million people, including approximately 1.5 million Jewish children? (Radcliff, 2004; United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 2014). The atrocious crimes committed during the Holocaust might compel someone to draw the conclusion that humans are innately evil. However, the trail of Adolf Eichmann, one of the major contributors to the Holocaust, stirred animosity as his defense requested the dismissal of
Milgram’s baseline experiment was to study whether people would comply with an authority figure during a brutal experiment or if they would utilize their own morals to make the experiment stop. This study was influenced by the Holocaust and Nazi war crimes. For his experiment he had taught an accomplice to pretend to receive electric shocks. The experimental subject/administrator was placed in front of some sort of dial and they were told would give them incrementing levels of shock to the actor. The administrator would then ask a series of questions and if he answered incorrectly the actor would then receive an electric shock.
Milgram himself concluded how easily ordinary people ‘can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority". (Milgram 1974) As this report has highlighted the research is not without controversy with many questioning to what extent Milgram’s experiment is true to real life and has been criticized for not highlighting further situational variables in determining obedience to authority. Regardless of this, there is no doubt Milgram highlighted a rather troubling phenomenon.
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.
This essay will describe Phillip Zimbardo’s conforming to social roles experiment and its contribution to our understanding of human behavior. It will start by talking about how the experiment started and how Phillip Zimbardo chose who became prisoner and who became prison guard it will then go on to discuss how the social roles started and began to change the students morals and ethics when the prisoner was stripped away from their identity and completely controlled and how power took control of the situation it will then lead on to the understanding of human behavior and how this changed the experiment that was supposed to last two weeks end just after six intense days. It will then end with the conclusion as a result of the experiment psychologists
In, “If Hitler Asked You to Electrocute a Stranger, Would You? Probably” Phillip Meyer discusses Stanley Milgram’s obedience experiment and the probability of normal people electrocuting a stranger. Milgram’s experiment was originally to show that Germans were different, which would explain the Nazis and the Holocaust. However, what he found was even more shocking. Milgram discovered that most people, not just Germans, are naturally very obedient.
Over time, the guards began to blindly follow their instructions, even if they were dehumanizing and mistreating the prisoners. The prisoners, in turn, became passive and resigned to their mistreatment. This experiment illustrates how even seemingly normal individuals can turn to evil when their individuality is compromised by societal pressure to
Milgrams study of obedience is about the tendency to conform to authority Milgram uses a doctor in a lab coat to represent authority and used volunteer subjects to shock another subject if they do not repeat three word correctly it can be compared to the villagers in Barrnetts article because Milgrams study showed that over 50% of the test subjects are willing to do what the authority the doctor in this case instructions or commands. It was proven on how far they went in shocking the other subject with the highest setting on the shocking device. The same can be linked on what the Nazi’s did to the villagers in Muanchaussen with the swift and decisive ways they took care of protesters made the Nazi’s the authority and must be adhered too in any case. And that even if people know it is wrong they still listen to the authority this is the case with the employees like the doctors and nurses also including the maintenance man working in the euthanasia camp they continue to do what they are told to do even when they know what is happening is
In Milgram’s obedience study, Milgram wanted to see what could cause average people to carry out inhumane acts. Most people have a conscience, or some kind of moral compass to guide them in what is right and wrong. Most people would not harm or kill an innocent person. However in some cases, like the Nazi’s, there were once normal citizens carrying out horrible acts against other people. Due to this Milgram wanted to see if ordered by an authority figure a normal citizen would carry out an act that is normally against their moral agenda.
The military spokesman justifies the gruesome and violent attacks towards Egyptian civilians by claiming, “… these soldiers were on duty, what were they supposed to do?” The idea of following orders is a common explanation many militants and police officers use in order to not be held liable. Scientist, Stanley Milgram, experiments the idea of becoming obedient towards authority that may control the decision of individuals. Milgram inspiration derives from the notorious Nazi officer, Adolf Eichmann, who similarly claims that he was simply following orders during the genocide of millions of Jews. Although, Stanley Milgram has proven that individuals tend to follow orders from authority, Egyptian militants who participated in the horrid attacks
In 1961, social scientist Stanley Milgram carried out research that explored what makes people do evil things even when they know that, morally, they are wrong (Milgram on Milgram (Part 1): Obedience experiments (The Open University, 2014). This study, known as the Milgram’s Obedience Study, aimed to see how far people would go in obeying an authority figure, particularly a malevolent one, who would advocate the administration of electric shock to fellow human beings. In 2009, this study was partially replicated by psychologist Jerry Burger in order to identify whether the outcomes of the study would be the same, even though the societal context had moved on by approximately four decades (Byford, 2014). In this essay, I will discuss key similarities