Milgram’s Obedience Study Milgram’s original motive for executing this ethics breaking experiment was to learn why the German people allowed the murder of millions of Jewish people during the Holocaust. Stanley Milgram wanted to learn as to how people can listen to authority and break their personal morals to follow someone that they believe to be control. During the Holocaust, Nazis led a massacre of millions of Jewish people without letting personal values, such as compassion, stop them from committing this crime. In a general perspective, Milgram wanted to understand the effect of authority and how far people would go to obey authority under extremely conflicting circumstances. If I were placed in this experiment under the teacher position,…
The goal of this paper is to review and analyze the article written by Stanley Milgram in 1963. This experiment was considered to be one of the most acknowledged research in the history of social psychology that revealed the unpredicted side of human nature. The author described the tendencies of obedience as inevitable part of our lives, particularly since we live in the complex systems of society where human interaction is unavoidable. He illustrated that this specific tendencies of human behavior was extremely relevant at this specific time in history, during which millions of innocent lives had systematically been lost through wars and fascist movements. It is clearly evident that the author became deeply curious about the nature of “obedience”…
Stanley Milgram in his essay “The Perils of Obedience”, illustrates that the division of labor “takes away from the human quality of work and life”(77). The soldier’s actions were not considered his, since he did not decide to be there, the people did. Milgram states, “He yields to authority but in doing so is alienated from his own actions”(77). The soldier submits and carries out what is told by him, yet cannot take any responsibility for what he truly does. The orders came from above, so he did not feel personally liable.…
Question 1 The Milgram study was done with the objection of finding out whether obedience for from an authoritative figure was a common occurrence, for example, the killing of Jews by Nazis. Therefore, how long were subjects willing to inflict pin on another person when asked to, despite knowing the seriousness of the injuries. From the experiment, the experimenter established routine through the use of the predefined prods such as ‘please go on and please continue (Myers & Twenge, 2017).’ That way the subject would know what to do when they would hear these words.…
Previously informed that they could leave the experiment at any time, the majority of the subjects continued to obey authority (85). If the man giving orders would have been dressed differently or have been less demanding, the subjects might have refused to go on. A United States marine is expected to follow orders without hesitation. U.S. military expert, Rod Powers, informs in his article "Military Orders" that a soldier in the military takes an oath to obey orders of any officer appointed over them (Powers). As marines, Dawson and Downey were required to obey their colonel.…
In the military, people follow orders from superiors on a daily basis, even when the orders are not morally sound. The article “The Perils of Obedience” written by Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist and infamous for his obedience experiment, focuses on the frequent human nature to submit to an authoritative figure. Milgram links his results to the reason why some Nazis carried out such ruthless acts: obedience overrules ethics in most cases (Milgram 89). Relatedly, Herbert C. Kelman and V. Lee Hamilton composed the article “The My Lai Massacre: A Military Crime of Obedience” to attempt to rationalize the brutalities committed by U.S. sodiers in the village of Son My. In their article, they include that authorization, routinization, and dehumanization were…
The article also includes the author's viewpoints on the military’s stance on the following order. The article “Just Do What the Pilot Tells You” is about how blind disobedience to authority is nonetheless more to be encouraged than blind disobedience. Dalrymple means this in a way that disobedience to authority isn’t more rewarding than obedience. Illegal orders and the outcomes that follow…
“The Perils of Obedience” written by Stanley Milgram and “Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience” written by Diana Baumrind are both intriguing articles about Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience. Diana Baumrind believes that Stanley Milgram failed at his experiences on obedience rather than succeeded. Stanley Milgram believed that he succeeded on his experiments if an authority figure tells the test subject to do something then the test subject will. “Stanley Milgram designed an experiment that forced participants either to violate their conscience by obeying the immoral demands of an authority figure or to refuse those demands” (Milgram 77). While both authors address experiments on obedience, Stanley Milgram approaches…
Before Milgram conducted his research, he has asked several people for their predictions on the results. No one, including experts, expected anyone apart from extreme cases to continue administering the electric shocks up to 450V. The experts expected most of the participants to refuse to continue before 150V. Results of Milgram’s experiment support the hypothesis that the obedience to authority could induce people to contribute to the Second World War’s homicide. Results of Hofling et al. ’s study show that obedience to authority can lead to violations of procedures and, consequently, putting human health and life into risk where the special care and meticulousness is expected. Both studies lead to conclusion that obedience to authority can lead to fatal consequences and this problem might be underestimated.…
In 1962, Stanley Milgram surprised the world with his study on obedience. To test his theory he invented an electronic box that would become a window into human cruelty. In ascending order, a row of buttons marked the amount of voltage one person would inflict upon another. Milgram’s original motive for the experiment was to understand the unthinkable: How could the German people permit the extermination of the Jews? Stanley Milgram wanted to understand the necessary conditions in which a person would obey an authority who commanded actions that went against conscience.…
Stanley Milgram, a Yale University psychologist, shares his results from an experiment he conducted in regards to obedience of authority in 1963 in, “The Perils of Obedience.” His experiment illustrated that when put under particular circumstances, ordinary citizens have the capability to perform terrible and unexpected actions (Milgram 85). Milgram rationalizes these proceedings through the conclusion that the average individual will decide to please the experimenter rather than resist his authority to protect the wellbeing of the learner (Milgram 86). Diana Baumrind, a psychologist who worked at the Institute of Human Development at the University of California, writes in response to Milgram’s experiment “Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments…
In the article "The Perils of Obedience” Stanley Milgram describes obedience as a basic element in the structure of social life and the effects it has on all communal living(Milgram 693). What if one is asked to be obedient to something that doesn’t aline with their personal morals? Milgram wanted to run an experiment to find this out. He simply wanted to know if the Nazis were acting out in pure evil or just simply following direct orders by a person who, they thought, was placed in a position of authority. In order to do this, he sets out to test how a normal person reacts when given violent orders by a person, who they believe are in a place of authority.…
The movie A Few Good Men provides a perspective with which to view the issues of the defense of obedience to authority when following instructions from superiors. Stanley Milgram, author of “The Perils of Obedience,” and Herbert C. Kelman and V. Lee Hamilton, authors of “The My Lai Massacre: A Military Crime of Obedience,” would likely argue that numerous factors other than intentional sadistic urges could cause a person to unnecessarily inflict violence on another human being. Both articles use psychological methods to examine the reasons a person would knowingly inflict pain on another human. Milgram’s article begins by explaining the dilemma of submission to authority and continues to describe his well-known experiment in its entirety (78-79).…
Ethical guidelines are crucial in research to minimise unnecessary physical or psychological harm to participants in an experiment. Before ethical guidelines existed in research, several experiments were not conducted ethically. In 1963, American psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted Milgram’s Study of Obedience investigating participants' obedience towards authority. The study demonstrated multiple ethical issues which proved the importance of ethics in research. This report will address the ethical principles that Milgram's study covered poorly and how they could be modified to improve the study.…
Diana Baumrind often disagreed with the ethics of the Milgram Experiment; however, Ian Parker took on a different perspective than she. Diana Baumrind, author of, Review of Stanley Milgram 's Experiments on Obedience, claims in his experiments the ethics he possessed were immoral and wrong. Throughout her article she continually disagreed with everything Milgram had "achieved", starting from the first experiments results which appeared as a review in American Psychologist in 1963 (Baumrind 89). While Diana disputed what she thought was the atrocious ethics of Milgram 's experiments, she furthermore believed Milgram should have debriefed the subjects more than what he had done (95). Although Baumrind opinionated her thoughts on these issues,…