Stanley Milgram, a Yale University psychologist, began an experiment in July 1961 that would drastically alter society’s perception of obedience. Milgram formulated a test to comprehend how far people would perform when coerced into obeying an authoritative figure. The experiment involved subjects being tricked into believing they were electrically shocking another individual; physical and emotional harm to the subjects was followed, resulting from the extreme tension they encountered. Ultimately, Milgram thought he found an underlying connection between his experiment and the Holocaust. The study manufactured mixed reactions from society. Countless psychologists, like Diana Baumrind and Ian Parker, voiced their critical opinions. Baumrind was a psychologist at the University of California, Berkeley at the time and
…show more content…
According to Baumrind and Parker, Milgram missed the mark with his experiment’s supposed link to the Holocaust, and the validity of the data produced was not worth the mistreatment of Milgram’s test subjects.
After Milgram scrutinized the information his experiment produced, he revealed what he understood to be an underlying connection to the events of the Holocaust. Milgram believed he had discovered that “ordinary people would inflict pain on someone else simply because someone in authority told them to,” which he assumed to explain the mass murder of six million Jews, as Gina Perry writes in DiscoverMagazine. Perry proceeds to describe how Milgram alleged that ordinary people reach an “agentic state,” submitting themselves to other’s orders. Furthering her discussion, Perry voices that Milgram’s claims were not what he observed in his experiment, hinting that the connection to the Holocaust is unfitting (Perry). Baumrind, in agreement
According to Baumrind and Parker, Milgram missed the mark with his experiment’s supposed link to the Holocaust, and the validity of the data produced was not worth the mistreatment of Milgram’s test subjects.
After Milgram scrutinized the information his experiment produced, he revealed what he understood to be an underlying connection to the events of the Holocaust. Milgram believed he had discovered that “ordinary people would inflict pain on someone else simply because someone in authority told them to,” which he assumed to explain the mass murder of six million Jews, as Gina Perry writes in DiscoverMagazine. Perry proceeds to describe how Milgram alleged that ordinary people reach an “agentic state,” submitting themselves to other’s orders. Furthering her discussion, Perry voices that Milgram’s claims were not what he observed in his experiment, hinting that the connection to the Holocaust is unfitting (Perry). Baumrind, in agreement