Daniel Parks Freshman Studies Term II Critical Analysis and Milgram’s Response Obedience to Authority and the obedience experiments that produced Stanley Milgram’s famous book have produced almost equal amounts of surprise, curiosity and criticism. The criticism of social psychologist John Darley and playwright Dannie Abse are each representative of the general criticism Milgram has received; Darley focuses on whether the study has any relevance to real world events (such as the Holocaust), and Abse focuses on justification of the experiment, i.e. was the study worth doing in spite of the deception employed and its potential harm to the subjects. To Milgram, this criticism demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the goals and implications of the obedience study, to which he has responded by restating the goal of the experiment and explaining its beneficial effects upon the subjects.…
Similar to Asch’s experiment, milgram also had ethical issues. Such as deception due to the fact that participants were led to believe, there was a real person being electrocuted. However if the…
The Milgram experiment was not done appropriately due to certain procedure taken place in the experiment. This would include the dishonesty and stress placed upon the teacher. The experiment was dishonest because it attracted the public by saying, “a study of memory…
Stanley Milgram’s experiment was conducted to justify the acts of Nazi killings during the World War II. Milgram’s general findings after the experiments: Ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figures even to the extent of hurting or killing other people. He claims that people can act inhumanely with limited feelings and compassion under blind obedience to authority. On his experiment, most of the participants continued to inflict the punishment all the way to the highest level when assured that they are not held responsible. Some participants went on and follow the commanded actions even if they seemed in conflict and against their conscience.…
Milgram did a lab experiment, varying different situational pressures to see which had the greatest effect on obedience. He told 40 male volunteers that it was a study of how punishment affects learning. After drawing lots, the real participant was assigned the role of 'teacher'. The learner was a confederate. The teachers job was to administrate a learning task and deliver 'electric shocks' to the learner (in another room) if he got a question wrong. The shocks began at 15 volts and increased in increment of 15 volts to a maximum of 450 volts.…
The Stanley Milgram experiment takes normal everyday people and gives them orders to do horrible…
Imagine yourself being shocked as an act of you incorrectly answering a question. In the Milgram Experiment, 40 men were recruited using newspaper ads in order to preform a test that would question human obedience. The question posed was: would they comply with an authority figures commands because they were stressed to, or would they comply because they thought it was the noble thing to do? The results clearly show that under authority, people will comply with what they are told to do even if they don't agree with it. Opening, obviously under certain circumstances people will change how they behave.…
Milgram's experiment in 1960 by social psychologist Dr. Stanely Milgram's (1963, 1965) was a controversial experiment. He researched the effect of authority on obedience. I don't think the scientific community overreacted to this experiment because it is unethical to reduce subjects to "twitching shuttering wrecks". Though the human mind is amazing strong we still do not know its breaking point. For interviewers to carry out the kind of experiment they did, they have to be willing to face the consequences of the experiment which could be a permanent damaged mental state. I do believe we need to do experiments like this as the outcome was very eye opening but it has to be better regulated and the background and methods of experimentation clearly…
Prior to the experiments, Milgram sought predictions about the outcome from psychiatrists, college sophomores, middle-class adults, graduate students and faculty in behavioral sciences. All thought the teachers would refuse to obey the experimenter. The majority of the teachers would show concern once the learners began showing signs of discomfort. However, 60 percent of them followed the orders until the end, administering shocks to the learner up to 450 volts. (para. 27) The findings were dismissed as having no relevance to “ordinary” people considering the subjects used were students of Yale. Colleagues of Milgram claimed that these students were highly aggressive and competitive when provoked. (para. 27)…
Stanley Milgram was an extremely famous psychologist who was best known for his groundbreaking experiment on the subject of obedience during the 1960s. Milgram began his career as a psychologist just around the time that the horrifying truth of the concentration camps came out. The fact that almost an entire nation obeyed one man, who commanded them to do inhumane and grotesque acts to other human beings intrigued Stanley Milgram. He became even more interested when he began watching the trial of Adolf Eichmann, who simply did not seem to be the appalling monster that many people expected and portrayed him to be. In fact, Milgram described Eichmann as being less of a “sadistic monster…[and] that he came closer to being an uninspired bureaucrat…
Throughout our nation's history, we have taken part in many unethical means of gaining information or knowledge. Some of the more famous cases include, The Milgram Obedience and Authority experiment, The Stanford Prison experiment, and of course the Abu Ghraib scandal involving our own U.S. soldiers. While two of these instances were not intended to cause physical harm, they were all branded unethical due to the extent of not only the physical abuses that took place, but the painful psychological impact it left on those involved.…
The first subject follows orders all the way up to 210 volts and then begins to question Milgram after the learner complains about heart problems. Even after being asked multiple times to continue she refused and the experiment is terminated. When asked in an interview afterwards she stated that she felt that the last shock she administered to the learner was extremely painful and said she “did not want to be responsible for any harm to him” (361)…
What are the limits of the government, which the majority cannot override? Does the government have the right to conscript its citizens and send them off to war? This raises the question of consent. Do we own ourselves? Does conscription violate the right of self possession? Mr. Sandel goes into great detail about Locks Government by Consent. The question of conscription or a draft by the military, is this action morally or ethically correct?…
I feel the reason the Milgram Experiment subjects were lacking the moral and critical thinking of how they reacted to the experiment was a multitude of things such as. The subjects felt they had to because they were being told to by “people of authority” They also felt that since they were participating in the experiment and they were only doing “as told” then they were okay to proceed. Some also stated that do to the trust they had for the school and the prestige it represented it also made it harder to say to no.…
The results showed that “sixty-two to sixty-five percent of us when faced with a credible authority, will follow orders to the point of lethally harming a person.” (Slater, Opening Skinners Box, pg.39) In other words, a man with a white coat told the participants no permanent damage would be caused to the muscles and that the experiment must go on so that then makes it ok to continue shocking someone against their will? What the man doesn’t tell you is that there is the chance a participant could suffer psychological damage or effects in the long term. People continued on to the end not even thinking about the four hundred fifty volts they just sent through another person.…