'Morality In Ian Parker's Obedience'

In Ian Parker’s article “Obedience”, Parker clearly states that he does not approve of Milgram’s findings and a multitude of other people agree with him. Parker discusses how it was morally wrong for Milgram to experiment on innocent people, the way he did. Throughout the article, Parker explains why he does not agree with Milgram, and how he performed the experiment. Parker backs up his claim with public opinions and additional data.
When Milgram first began his experiment, it was out of haste. Therefore, he did not develop a theory nor did he have any intentions of studying similar experiments, to gain further knowledge of the issue. He started by designing a machine that would allow a person (teacher) to shock another person (learner). …show more content…
After his experiment erupted, Milgram’s reputation crumbled. He was no longer known as an extraordinary scientist; but instead as an immoral, and corrupt human being, and in effect, he left Yale for Harvard. Milgram lived a happy life in Cambridge for four years, however, he eventually left because of discrimination in the work place. With his reputation gone, Milgram had to continue his studies at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, for he could not sustain a job at an Ivy League school due to his …show more content…
Parker begins his article by telling the reader about Milgram’s “evil” study and how Milgram was unprepared for what happened post study. After Milgram finished his study, he didn’t know how to put the experiment into words, therefore causing a controversy over morality. Parker leads the story by adding his opinion of Milgram, and how unethical he was towards the volunteers that would later have mental break downs. As Parker added more of his opinion, he had to incorporate other opinions to get the reader on his side. Overall, Parker made his opinion clear and backed it up by using credible sources, such as; Arthur G. Miller, Bruno Bettelheim, and Philip