The Perils Of Obedience Stanley Milgram Analysis

“The Perils of Obedience” written by Stanley Milgram and “Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience” written by Diana Baumrind are both intriguing articles about Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience. Diana Baumrind believes that Stanley Milgram failed at his experiences on obedience rather than succeeded. Stanley Milgram believed that he succeeded on his experiments if an authority figure tells the test subject to do something then the test subject will. “Stanley Milgram designed an experiment that forced participants either to violate their conscience by obeying the immoral demands of an authority figure or to refuse those demands” (Milgram 77). While both authors address experiments on obedience, Stanley Milgram approaches …show more content…
Both writers have a different view over ethics as some might say Stanley Milgram believes that his experiment is fine and not inhumane; however he believes that he has conducted this experiment for science. Even though some test subjects such as “Gretchen Brandt, a Yale Medical Technician who works at Yale, asks throughout the experiment, ‘Shall I continue?’” (79 Milgram). Some might think that Stanley Milgram does not care about how the test subject feels until the end of the experiment. Which is true according to himself during the experiment if the test subject asks if he or she shall continue after the person getting shocked asks to stop, The experimenter says countless times “The experiment requires that you go on" (Milgram 79). Some might think that Stanley Milgram is an awful person for making these people go through such harsh choices on what is the right thing, Stanley Milgram states that “the subjects do not derive satisfaction from inflicting pain, but they often like the feeling they get from pleasing the experimenter" (86 …show more content…
Diana Baumrind expects that others should help one another even when facing difficult decisions. In Stanley Milgram’s article he believes that his experiment is close to why the Nazis behaved as they did, since they were under stress and an authority figure told them to do things to the Jews. Diana Baumrind believes that the experiment should not compare to the German Nazis; however she believes that the test subjects are not in as near enough stress as what the German Nazis undertook. However Stanley Milgram states “After the interview, procedures were undertaken to assure that the subject would leave the laboratory in a state of well being. “A friendly reconciliation was arranged between the subject and the victim, in an effort was made to reduce any tensions that arose as a result of the experiment" (92 Baumrind). Diana Baumrind contradicts Stanley Milgram by stating in her article, “It would be interesting to know what sort of procedures could dissipate the type of emotional disturbance” (92 Baumrind).Diana Baumrind believes in her article that if the experiment is not as bad as what Stanley Milgram thinks it is then why does there have to be procedures after the test? If the experiment is not inhumane then why does the psychologist Stanley Milgram need to conduct procedures to make