Discovering Social Conformity
The regulation of own behavior at times can be intriguing guided my self-esteem and social acceptance. However, can our morals reach to a point where social obedience overrides our own beliefs? How can such behavior be tested? Milgram and Zimbardo tested such belief and came to discover the astonishing human behavior. Milgram’s and Zimbardo’s study confirm that conformity is a natural response in human nature regardless of social norms.
Milgram’s Study: Organized a group of volunteers to act as teachers or instructors. Then Milgram acted as the authority in the group establishing his dominant role he told the teachers to administer to a total stranger electrical shocks (Haslam & Reicher, 2012). In Haslam & Reicher …show more content…
In Miller (2014) it becomes questionable the data obtain in both experiments, due to the inability to determine if it is self-bias what cause an immoral action rather than obedience itself. Which often Milgram has stated that the teacher had the ability at any time to decide not to administer the high voltage. Thus, when does it become the duty to disobey the establish law of power? In Miller (2014) such distinction seems difficult even in a military setting because the duty is to obey the power however, the power if unfair or morally unjust.
Benefits/ Effects on Humanity The study reveals that humans tend to rely on dominant response (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014), and although the dominant role tends to provide the authority it is up to the individual to decide to act upon such behavior or question it. Furthermore, implying that humanity constantly is in limbo with social acceptance and will do anything possible to feel in a group and thus feel a sense of belonging. In addition, in Miller (2014) stated that such experiment gave evidence that people tend to give the authority and responsibility to others and thus minimized their expectations.
What is the outlook on extreme …show more content…
The need to distinguish different biases and questions such research. Much like Milgram and Zimbardo, questioning obedience in society. Although research has their guidelines as established by IRB (Lunstroth, 2011) such guidelines are left for group interpretation. That being said, what a group of individual’s view as morally wrong might not be in reality. Thus, such research must be obtained and the only way to obtain it is to test such hypothesis. In Snow (2009) research explained how ethical experiments explain such tyranny behavior in the military. It is a constant battle between the virtues self -view and the route taken to achieve that power. Without undergoing harsh emotional experiments, humans would not understand the complexity of human nature and their need and desire to unite and fit in. Society is what motivates people to grow and adapt. Even when facing harsh dilemmas, they have the right and ability to choose what they feel is morally right (Snow, 2009). Thus, when they neglect to do so, self- desire to obtain social acceptance is what motivates such controversial
The regulation of own behavior at times can be intriguing guided my self-esteem and social acceptance. However, can our morals reach to a point where social obedience overrides our own beliefs? How can such behavior be tested? Milgram and Zimbardo tested such belief and came to discover the astonishing human behavior. Milgram’s and Zimbardo’s study confirm that conformity is a natural response in human nature regardless of social norms.
Milgram’s Study: Organized a group of volunteers to act as teachers or instructors. Then Milgram acted as the authority in the group establishing his dominant role he told the teachers to administer to a total stranger electrical shocks (Haslam & Reicher, 2012). In Haslam & Reicher …show more content…
In Miller (2014) it becomes questionable the data obtain in both experiments, due to the inability to determine if it is self-bias what cause an immoral action rather than obedience itself. Which often Milgram has stated that the teacher had the ability at any time to decide not to administer the high voltage. Thus, when does it become the duty to disobey the establish law of power? In Miller (2014) such distinction seems difficult even in a military setting because the duty is to obey the power however, the power if unfair or morally unjust.
Benefits/ Effects on Humanity The study reveals that humans tend to rely on dominant response (Baumeister & Bushman, 2014), and although the dominant role tends to provide the authority it is up to the individual to decide to act upon such behavior or question it. Furthermore, implying that humanity constantly is in limbo with social acceptance and will do anything possible to feel in a group and thus feel a sense of belonging. In addition, in Miller (2014) stated that such experiment gave evidence that people tend to give the authority and responsibility to others and thus minimized their expectations.
What is the outlook on extreme …show more content…
The need to distinguish different biases and questions such research. Much like Milgram and Zimbardo, questioning obedience in society. Although research has their guidelines as established by IRB (Lunstroth, 2011) such guidelines are left for group interpretation. That being said, what a group of individual’s view as morally wrong might not be in reality. Thus, such research must be obtained and the only way to obtain it is to test such hypothesis. In Snow (2009) research explained how ethical experiments explain such tyranny behavior in the military. It is a constant battle between the virtues self -view and the route taken to achieve that power. Without undergoing harsh emotional experiments, humans would not understand the complexity of human nature and their need and desire to unite and fit in. Society is what motivates people to grow and adapt. Even when facing harsh dilemmas, they have the right and ability to choose what they feel is morally right (Snow, 2009). Thus, when they neglect to do so, self- desire to obtain social acceptance is what motivates such controversial