Articles on Whether to Obey or to not Obey

In this article, “Just Do What the pilot Tells You” Theodore Dalrymple and “The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror” by Crispin Sartwell express two different viewpoints expressed towards obedience. While both authors are addressing the issue of disobedience, Dalrymple approaches the issue, stating, “Some people think a determined opposition to authority is principled and romantic” (Dalrymple 3) while on the other hand, Sartwell emphasizes that authority, especially hierarchies are the most “evil” thing in our society. Despite the well-executed argument of the two author's, Dalrymple takes a self-centered approach, forcing the reader to agree with his opinion.

Individuals often yield to conformity when they are forced to discard their individual freedom in order to benefit the larger group. Despite the fact that it is important to obey the authority, obeying the authority can sometimes be hazardous especially when morals and autonomous thought are suppressed to an extent that the other person is harmed. Obedience usually involves doing what a rule or a person tells you to but negative consequences can result from displaying obedience to authority for example; the people who obeyed the orders of Adolph Hitler ended up killing innocent people during the Holocaust. In the same way, Stanley Milgram noted in his article ‘Perils of Obedience’ of how individuals obeyed authority and

In "Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem," Erich Fromm (1963) argues that society will self-destruct without achieving freedom through disobedience. Fromm begins with analogies of Hebrew and Greek mythology showing how disobedience to a god freed humans. Using this correlation, Fromm shows freedom as a condition for disobedience, and vice- versa. Therefore, Fromm proclaims that without disobedience the human race could destroy itself within a generation.

Fromm makes a very remarkable point when he states, “If a man can only obey and not disobey, he is a slave; if he can only disobey and not obey, he is a rebel(not a revolutionary); he acts out of anger, disappointment, resentment, yet not in the name of a conviction or a principle (Fromm 685)”. This statement leaves little doubt that we cannot come up with an accurate definition or reason behind obedience to authority. Essentially there is no gray area between obedience and disobedience. At this point in the essay, Fromm is very close to convincing the reader that obedience is a psychological and physical problem through the various examples in history he has cited. Fromm continues to make his case that disobedience is detrimental to society by explaining the two types of conscience that develop within the human psyche when confronted with a important decision. The first type of conscience is authoritarian conscience which deals with the internal voice that aims to please an authority figure out of fear. The second type, humanistic conscience, can be explained as the voice in the back of your head that allows you to tell what is human and inhuman. The complexity of defining which conscience ultimately decides your actions can be explained by

Those who are in power are not accountable to constituencies and public policy does not derive from social consent. Within sociology and political science, particularly within comparative politics, authoritarianism has been understood as a modern type of political regime. Therefore, the concept focuses on the way of accessing, exercising, and organizing power, on the nature of the belief system, and the role of citizens in the political

“Disobedience is the true foundation of liberty. The obedient must be slaves.” Henry David Thoreau, a well known essayist, wrote: Walden. Thoreau supports Wilde’s claim of disobedience promoting social progress. He mentions that people who live in obedience are not living at all. Progress is defined as a forward or onward movement toward a destination. The only way society can progress is through evolution, as people grow from a simple neanderthal to complex modern humans like us. And in order to evolve, there must be a break in pattern: disobedience-failure or refusal to obey rules in authority. There is no development if everyone is a collective mind. Examples are seen in Ray Bradbury’s novel Fahrenheit 451 with the protagonist, Montag,

Every day, governments control what people know, what they learn, and what they can do. What if the people in society were punished for believing differently than their government? In the book, “1984” by George Orwell, the government manipulated the people into believing a certain way, the government’s way. If the people challenged the beliefs of the government, they were tortured excessively, then carefully sculpted and shaped into an ally of the government. Their old self no longer existed. In Orwell’s “1984”, society is controlled by the government and people are being altered to fit the government’s idea of a true follower. In our society today, social media has begun to sculpt and shape its followers.

Renowned dystopian author, George Orwell, once stated, “It is not possible for any thinking person to live in such a [corrupt] society as our own without wanting to change it." It is true that any democracy favoring individual could identify corruption in their society and strive to refine it. But what would happen to a society when one’s freedom to think and hold an opinion is revoked? How would a society transform if government issued restraints were implemented to lessen an individual's advanced qualities and make them equivalent to everyone else's? In so many works of dystopian literature, societal corruption is blatantly apparent, and becomes the driving force for any freedom seekers’ aspiration

Totalitarianism diminishes the idea of individuality and destroys all chances of self-improvement, and human’s natural hunger for knowledge. In George Orwell’s famous novel, “1984”, totalitarianism is clearly seen in the exaggerated control of the state over every single citizen, everyday, everywhere. Totalitarianism can also be seen in the book “Brave New World” by Aldous Huxley, in which humans are synthetically made and conditioned for their predestinated purpose on earth. The lack of individualism will lead a community towards a dystopia in which freedom is vanished by the uncontrolled power of the state.

He also stated that people should rise up against tyranny. He said that all men have a duty to disobey bad orders. These ideas are all exemplified in Western culture, where value is placed on effort, and not only and result. The rise against tyranny also affects the establishment of a new type of system, known as democracy.

Erich Fromm’s essay “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem” suggests that humankind’s evolution has, and continues to rely on man’s capability to exercise disobedience. While discussing the positions of disobedience being considered a vice, and obedience being a virtue, Fromm reflects upon the history of Adam and Eve believing that “eating the forbidden fruit” was man’s first act of disobedience. This is the point that broke the bond between man and nature requiring man to be dependant upon his own powers, while rewarding him with his “complete” humanity, freedom,

The author exemplifies the ways that disobedience helps the society and its contribution to furthering the human race but notes on the fact that blind obedience may eventually account for the end of civilization.

Disobedience has been a man’s virtue ever since laws have been constructed. As a progression that has developed in our society , it is safely to indicate that disobedience is morally acceptable by the common people. In order for change, people have demonstrated  disobedience successfully to promote social progress, change is impossible without disobedience.Our society has failed to realize that there is no such thing a “perfect society”. There are people in our society who agree with change and would sacrifice themselves for it through violence and multiple times of rejection. Many individuals known as the majority simply do not like change. This majority is the group that construct these laws that we must follow.  Thoreau states ,” A majority is permitted , and for a long period continue, to rule, is not because they are mostly likely right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority,  but because they are physically the strongest.” Although we do perceive the system as the strongest, citizens still use disobedience to challenge the system’s authority. Disobedience is a man’s virtue when our natural rights are being violated by the majority . In order for change to occur the common people must use disobedience to fight the injustice in their society to promote social progress.

The article, “The Authoritarian Personality,” written by Erich Fromm discusses the common and different characteristics between the two forms of an authoritarian personality. He starts to explain how one becomes a mature person. He states that to become a mature person, said person needs to have developed love and reason. He then states that an authoritarian character has not reached maturity, and therefore, has not developed love or reason. Erich Fromm continues to explain that the difference between the ruler and the ruled is how they start to feel “greater.” The way the ruled feels “greater” is by depending on their ruler for guidance and by following the ruler to become a part of the larger group. The way the ruler feels “greater” is by depending on the ruled to continue to look at them as strong and powerful. He then points out that one person can hold both the ruler and the ruled characteristics. Erich Fromm continues to explain the differences between rational and irrational authority and where these two forms of authority are found. He ends by saying that the understanding of love and reason, and developing said characteristics is the foundation to a person’s own authority and political democracy. While reading this article, it brought me back to all the times I have dealt with people who have authoritative personalities and how it affected me. As stated by Erich Fromm, all people with authority personalities contain components of both the ruler and the ruled.

One of the facets of living within civilized society is that there are certain norms and social conventions that people must follow. Frequently, there is a large effort on the part of government, financial, and social institutions to keep people doing most of the same thing as others going to work, driving cars, buying homes, etc. Despite the fact that people engage in these efforts individually, the simple fact that they are all attempting to do the same thing, in much the same way, is indicative of the fact that they are engaged in collective behavior. THESIS: Those who are able to overcome collective behavior and allow for their individuality to determine their own outcomes exemplify the best of human nature.