“Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem” Disobedience as a Phycological & Moral Problem by Erich Fromm

Obedience to people in authority is a deep-rooted trait that we all possess by virtue of our upbringing, and as Milgram put it, “it is only the person dwelling in isolation who is not forced to respond, with defiance or submission, to the commands of others” (Milgram 1974). This trait is exhibited every day in family circles, workplace and school. People are most likely to obey instructions from people they perceive their authority to be legal or moral. We see people obeying their pastors, leaders in various societies and other people they see as higher to them; and they obey anything they are being told even if it involves killing another human being. They justify their actions, however wrong, on obedience to authority.

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.

Human beings possess several virtues that differentiate them from other creatures and can use them in ways that represent their perceptions of social order. Surprisingly, Oscar Wilde believes that disobedience is an original virtue of every human and that it is responsible for progress and development. While Wilde’s claim is not entirely accurate, it is largely valid as evidenced by the recent events across the world, including the US, that have led to positive outcomes in spite of being termed and perceived as acts of disobedience.

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.

The Nuremburg Trials of 1945 were some of the most controversial military tribunals to be held in the 20th century. In the trials, Nazi war criminals were put on trial for the atrocities they committed against the Jewish population of Germany. When asked why they had committed such acts of horror, many of the Nazi soldiers attested by saying that they were under orders to do so. The trials questioned the motives behind instances of mass human torment which have led many scientists and psychologists to strive to understand the rationality behind human obedience. Two of these psychologists, Theodore Dalrymple and Erich Fromm explored the instances in which disobedience and obedience to authority should be applied. Fromm wrote his article

Imagine a world where a government orders its people to follow their laws and everyone follows them. Would you stand by and allow this control to take place? In Thoreau’s essay “In defense of civil disobedience” and Jon Krakauer’s novel, Into the Wild they both saw themselves as people forced out by the immorality rampant in organized society. They make their connection through the views that Thoreau had leading to the development of Chris McCandless Philosophy, relationship with the government, and their journeys through life are to be considered rebellious to their social life. They wish to live on there own not wanting any support from those who are the government people.

Civil disobedience is defined as the “refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in government policy or legislation, characterized by nonviolent means”; theories on this topic have been debated for centuries. (American Heritage Dictionary 3rd Edition pg161) Henry David Thoreau was well known for his refusal to participate in the political systems or activities of his era, not only by refusing to pay his poll taxes for six consecutive years, but also by announcing that he did not wish to be regarded as a member of any incorporated society. In Civil Disobedience, Thoreau stresses the need to prioritize one’s conscience over the dictates of laws. A person should not be obligated to devote his or her life to eliminating evils from the world, but is only obligated not to participate in such evils themselves. He argues that the government rarely proves itself useful and this derives from the power from the majority because they are the strongest group, not because they hold the most legitimate views. Justice is the quality of being just, impartial or fair. Thoreau doubted the effectiveness of reform within the government, and argued that voting and petitioning for change served useless. He felt that justice had different standards for each different group. Which raises the question, is justice fair for everyone? When a government is unjust, people should

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.

Erich Fromm wrote "Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem," in 1963, an essay detailing balance between obedience and disobedience.

In society, obedience to authority is ingrained in humanity from an early age, causing some individuals to blindly obey orders without contemplating the credibility of the source. In psychoanalyst Erich Fromm’s article “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem,” he explains that throughout human history obedience has been associated with virtue and disobedience with sin (Fromm 127). Fromm suggests that our conscience is an internalized voice of authority (126). Fromm claims individuals need to distinguish the difference between rational and irrational authority because obedience is effective when individuals want to obey, instead of fearing to disobey (127). Two other authors who examine obedience are Herbert C. Kelman and V. Lee

Why someone may cause harm to themselves by eating too much food or starve themselves is different in any case throughout society, but the real question is why someone would follow through with the voice telling them to do it. In the article “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem” author Erich Fromm would say that the reason a person would ever inflict this kind of pain upon oneself is because of their humanistic conscience. Fromm says that the humanistic conscience is “the ability to be and to judge oneself” (126). So if someone does not like their appearance then they will listen to their conscience that is telling them that they are not good enough, and physically hurt themselves to the point where it has become life threatening. Fromm would also say that disobedience has a negative reputation. Fromm says “...history obedience has been identified with virtue and disobedience with sin” (127). Throughout history, disobedience has been seen as a wrong thing to do, so people have been obedient to things that they should not be. So when someone's conscience tells them to eat another slice of pizza to make them happy and take their mind off the bad things, then they listen because they believe it is the right thing to do, which it is not. Fromm explains how someone can overcome this voice is to just say no, which is a hard thing to do. He states “A person can become free through acts of disobedience by learning to say no to power”(127). Learning to say no is

Now approaching my other inclination, from the day we came into this world, we have had our decisions made` by others. Even today our decisions are made by others; we don’t see it clearly but who’s to say our decisions aren’t based on what society expects. We have been taught that disobedience is a vice and that obedience is a virtue. In fact, its actually the opposite; Many believe the first act that was committed by humankind was an act of disobedience when Adam and Eve disobeyed orders and ate the forbidden fruit. This act freed mankind, showing the importance of disobedience, without the acts of disobedience humans couldn’t have evolved. The way to become free is by disobeying power and by having the courage to say no. Throughout history, we have seen famous figures such as Nelson Mandela and his fight against Apartheid, and Martin Luther King Jr’s bravery during the civil rights movement. Nevertheless, these are my two view points which have changed with time its arduous to side with

When someone hears the word disobedience it usually leads to the thought of misbehaving for the wrong reasons. For some people disobedience is an act of freedom, for some it releases them from what has always been so they can live lives they have always imagined. Erich Fromm makes thought-provoking points in his book “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem”. He talks about the concept of Disobedience with religion as well as touching base with different kinds of obedience to power, and his thoughts on what freedom is through the act of disobedience. Many of his thoughts were directed towards religion but may be interpreted in different ways. Disobedience is going to happen, the younger individuals are when they test limits the better because the stakes are not high.

disobedience is the think defying of a law to propel an ethical guideline or change government arrangement. It might be bound to infringing upon just specific laws which are viewed as shameful, as in the social liberties development in the USA in the 1960s. Then again thoughtful noncompliance can incorporate overstepping different laws as a method for attracting thoughtfulness regarding the apparent treachery, for instance by harm to property, non-installment of fines or assessments, hindrance of building work, and trespassing. The individuals who rehearse either sort of common noncompliance will acknowledge the outcomes of their activities as a method for promoting their cause. Henry David Thoreau initially enunciated the principles of common