The Controversy Of Stanley Milgram's Experiments On Obedience

The controversy of Professor Stanley Milgram’s experiment stems from the questionable ethnics involved and the debatable reasoning behind the entire procedure which results in study after study of Milgram's work. The Milgram Experiment, a project performed by Milgram in 1963, was meant to show how obedient people are when put under extreme pressure. He compared his results to the Holocaust on the hunch that the commanding officers were so blinded by the situation that even the average Joe could have performed a similar task. Fellow psychologist Diana Baumrind shoots down Milgram’s proposals in her article "Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience." Baumrind effectively states that he unethically placed the subjects in situations …show more content…
With the events they experienced, the subjects were to be calmed and must confirm they were in a state of wellbeing and emotionally stable (Baumrind 92). Milgram failed to provide proper therapy to his subjects and follow as the American Psychological Association's Code of Conduct states in section 10.10: "Psychologists terminate therapy when it becomes reasonably clear that the client no longer needs the service, is not likely to benefit, or is being harmed by continued service" ("Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct"). With the strain the subjects were put under, Baumrind would agree that it did not seem "reasonable clear" of the state the subjects were in ("Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct"). As Parker points out, the protocol for APA has changed since then which was partly due partly due to Milgram's experiment (Parker 99). Because of his ethics, Milgram experienced extreme stress and criticism which as Parker properly states, "…in the opinion of Arthur G. Miller, it may have contributed to his premature death" (Parker 99). According to Jane Swanke, stress may easily lead to a sudden heart attack, which backs up Miller's accusation (Swanke). Milgram's questionable ethics and pressure may have cost him his …show more content…
Milgram effectively pointed out that the officers were told the Jews were not human beings and we taught that they were not valuable in any way (Baumrind 93). Unlike the brainwashed Nazis, the subjects in Milgram's experiment were raised by the law and although the pressure was high, it was not nearly as extreme as what Hitler's Nazis faced everyday of World War II. Gina Perry accurately combats Baumrind in her article "The Shocking Truth of the Notorious Milgram Obedience Experiments" (Perry). Perry states how Milgram sought to compare the subjects and the soldiers; however, the subjects never seemed to have the immediate, "zombie-like" behavior as he had proclaimed they would (Perry). Milgram desired people to observe as he and Hannah Arendt had in her book "Eichmann in Jerusalem" (Parker 97). Eichmann was a Nazi officer who followed orders by being the one to order the murders of hundreds of innocent Jews. Arendt saw Eichmann as a victim to the cruelties of other's ideas (Milgram 85). She believed he was just obeying the officer over him (Milgram 85). However, Sol Stern would say otherwise in his review, "The Lies of Hannah Arendt." Stern sees that Arendt truly admitted to herself the cruelties Eichmann did order (Stern). He states, "Hannah Arendt took it