“James, go chop that wood outside.” “James, don’t put your elbows on the table.” “James, put that phone of yours away.” Obedience has been a common theme in many households spanning hundreds of generations. This topic is one of the main ideas in the movie, A Few Good Men. In the movie, two Marines stationed at Guantanamo Marine Base in Cuba, are accused of killing a fellow Marine William Santiago. Daniel Kaffee, Jo Galloway, and Sam Weinberg all try to convince the courts that these men did not commit murder because they were following an order. There were some questions that was never truly answered in the movie. Were the two boys responsible for Santiago's death if they were given an order? If they were, did they even have a choice? Additionally,
…show more content…
The reason why the two boys were charged with the crime of murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and conduct unbecoming a united states marine was because they claimed they took an order from their authority. In Stanley Milgram’s recollection from his experiment, The Perils of Obedience, he tells of taking orders from higher up or an authority. In the experiment the “teachers” have to give the “learners” (the learners are actors) words. The “learner” is sitting in an electric chair and every time the “learner” gets it wrong, the “teacher” is told by the “experimenter” to shock him. The presence and the voice of authority would make the “teacher” go on, even if it violated their moral beliefs. In the recollection Milgram recalls, “Prozi: Something’s happened to that man in there. You better check on him, sir. He won’t answer or nothing. Experimenter: Continue. Go on, please. Prozi: You accept all responsibility? Experimenter: The responsibility is mine. Correct please go on. (Subject returns to his list, starts running through words as rapidly as he can read them)” (Milgram 83). The presence of the authority is a major part of why these people continued. They had the urge to please the higher up. This concept is also the same in the movie. The Marines had the urgent need to please their higher up, while also pleasing the people of their country. These Marines taking order from …show more content…
If they were, did they have a choice not to be guilty? Also, if they were guilty, did they show the three traits necessary for torture? On the question of whether they were guilty was inconclusive and highly based on opinion. If the answer was yes, they were guilty because they had no tell tale signs of knowing what was right and what was wrong. If it was no, they were given and order and a Marine never disobeys an order. The other question of whether they had a choice was a matter of if they listened to their “humanistic conscience” or just their “authoritarian conscience” The lasy question of if they exhibited the three traits for torture was proven true. They exhibited authoritarian, routinization, and dehumanization. The action of obedience is a topic that humans everywhere are hardwired to do. Whether it be taking an order from your parents, your boss, or even a police officer. Most people are just hardwired to obey an authority. Even if we think about it or not, it is what keeps our society functioning and
The reason why the two boys were charged with the crime of murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and conduct unbecoming a united states marine was because they claimed they took an order from their authority. In Stanley Milgram’s recollection from his experiment, The Perils of Obedience, he tells of taking orders from higher up or an authority. In the experiment the “teachers” have to give the “learners” (the learners are actors) words. The “learner” is sitting in an electric chair and every time the “learner” gets it wrong, the “teacher” is told by the “experimenter” to shock him. The presence and the voice of authority would make the “teacher” go on, even if it violated their moral beliefs. In the recollection Milgram recalls, “Prozi: Something’s happened to that man in there. You better check on him, sir. He won’t answer or nothing. Experimenter: Continue. Go on, please. Prozi: You accept all responsibility? Experimenter: The responsibility is mine. Correct please go on. (Subject returns to his list, starts running through words as rapidly as he can read them)” (Milgram 83). The presence of the authority is a major part of why these people continued. They had the urge to please the higher up. This concept is also the same in the movie. The Marines had the urgent need to please their higher up, while also pleasing the people of their country. These Marines taking order from …show more content…
If they were, did they have a choice not to be guilty? Also, if they were guilty, did they show the three traits necessary for torture? On the question of whether they were guilty was inconclusive and highly based on opinion. If the answer was yes, they were guilty because they had no tell tale signs of knowing what was right and what was wrong. If it was no, they were given and order and a Marine never disobeys an order. The other question of whether they had a choice was a matter of if they listened to their “humanistic conscience” or just their “authoritarian conscience” The lasy question of if they exhibited the three traits for torture was proven true. They exhibited authoritarian, routinization, and dehumanization. The action of obedience is a topic that humans everywhere are hardwired to do. Whether it be taking an order from your parents, your boss, or even a police officer. Most people are just hardwired to obey an authority. Even if we think about it or not, it is what keeps our society functioning and