Following the horrific events of the German Holocaust, psychologists and psychiatrists have been attempting to answer questions on obedience. At the heart of the debate is why some humans naturally are obedient to authority, and why others have a tendency to be disobedient. Among the many people researching this topic are Erich Fromm and Theodore Dalrymple. Fromm’s work suggests that Freudian ideology shapes tendencies of obedience. Dalrymple claims that experiences in childhood outline impulses to obey. Whether it is Freudian ideas or childhood experiences that format obedience, obedience is deeply rooted in one’s mental psyche.
Erich Fromm writes his findings in his work Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem. In it Fromm asserts …show more content…
Therefore, he concludes that because the world began with a disobedient act the world will likely end with an obedient act. On a more analytical level Fromm explores how he believes that Freudian ideology is the underlying reason for obedience. Theodore Dalrymple’s work Just Do What the Pilot Tells You offers a different explanation for obedience. Dalrymple believes that obedience is not entirely negative as society is complex and depends on acts of obedience. If a person cannot understand the inner workings of society, then they are not able to challenge authority in good judgment. Therefore, acts of disobedience cannot always be good. Dalrymple’s theory for why some people are obedient and others disobedient is based on childhood and upbringing.
Fromm believes that the future of the world is dependent on people disobeying. Fromm writes, “The organization man has lost the capacity to …show more content…
Fromm lived during the cold war. This was an era where much of the population worried about the world ending in a nuclear war. Nuclear power is what Fromm is referring to when he mentions the suicide of mankind. Dalrymple’s environment also affects his argument. Dalrymple lives currently in a time period where technology has become more powerful and more complex. Dalrymple’s claim that society is too complex to fully understand is not comparable to the thoughts of Fromm because of this time period gap. Both Erich Fromm and Theodore Dalrymple offer their own thoughts on obedience. Ultimately, many of the claims made cannot be compared because of the context in which both men were
Erich Fromm writes his findings in his work Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem. In it Fromm asserts …show more content…
Therefore, he concludes that because the world began with a disobedient act the world will likely end with an obedient act. On a more analytical level Fromm explores how he believes that Freudian ideology is the underlying reason for obedience. Theodore Dalrymple’s work Just Do What the Pilot Tells You offers a different explanation for obedience. Dalrymple believes that obedience is not entirely negative as society is complex and depends on acts of obedience. If a person cannot understand the inner workings of society, then they are not able to challenge authority in good judgment. Therefore, acts of disobedience cannot always be good. Dalrymple’s theory for why some people are obedient and others disobedient is based on childhood and upbringing.
Fromm believes that the future of the world is dependent on people disobeying. Fromm writes, “The organization man has lost the capacity to …show more content…
Fromm lived during the cold war. This was an era where much of the population worried about the world ending in a nuclear war. Nuclear power is what Fromm is referring to when he mentions the suicide of mankind. Dalrymple’s environment also affects his argument. Dalrymple lives currently in a time period where technology has become more powerful and more complex. Dalrymple’s claim that society is too complex to fully understand is not comparable to the thoughts of Fromm because of this time period gap. Both Erich Fromm and Theodore Dalrymple offer their own thoughts on obedience. Ultimately, many of the claims made cannot be compared because of the context in which both men were