Few Good Men Obedience

A Few Good Men portrays the importance of military orders, the reality of the ranking system and how much military leader’s authority can cloud their judgement. Former psychology professor at Yale, Stanley Milgram sought the reasoning behind the blindness of individuals when ordered to perform a task for someone who seems to be an authority figure. His infamous experiment was and is currently being dug through and examined thoroughly. Milgram’s research caught the attention of fellow psychologist Philip Zimbardo. Zimbardo conducted an experiment with similar interests in mind. He collected 21 men from newspaper advertisements to live in a false prison and live in the prison for two weeks. The experiment lasted six days due to how quickly the experiment escalated and transformed the “prisoners” and “guards” (Zimbardo 116). Their conclusions from both experiments are that power and stress can transform even the strongest willed people. Zimbardo and Milgram discuss the same sort of entitlement Colonel Jessup presumes to order an illegal code red due to his position on the base at Guantanamo Bay; also the entitlement Lieutenant Daniel Kaffee had over the case due to the position his father once had.

A person’s decisions, whether they are following directions or are making their own choices, will change their lives. The effect of a decision is played out in the movie A Few Good Men. In the movie, Lance Cpl. Harold W. Dawson and Pfc. Louden Downey’s decision to follow the orders of Col. Nathan R. Jessup to perform a code red on Pfc. Santiago, a “sub-par marine”, results in them accidentally killing Santiago. Dawson and Downey are originally blamed for Santiago’s death; however, Lt. Daniel Kaffee is able to convince the jury to drop the charges of murder and conspiracy to commit murder. Despite this, both Marines are given a dishonorable discharge for performing the code red on Santiago (A Few Good Men). In Erich Fromm’s article, “Disobedience

The motion picture A Few Good Men challenges the question of why Marines obey their superiors’ orders without hesitation. The film illustrates a story about two Marines, Lance Corporal Harold W. Dawson and Private First Class Louden Downey charged for the murder of Private First Class William T. Santiago. Lieutenant Daniel Kaffee, who is known to be lackadaisical and originally considers offering a plea bargain in order to curtail Dawson’s and Downey’s sentence, finds himself fighting for the freedom of the Marines; their argument: they simply followed the orders given for a “Code Red”. The question of why people follow any order given has attracted much speculation from the world of psychology. Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist,

“The Perils of Obedience” was written by Stanley Milgram in 1974. In the essay he describes his experiments on obedience to authority. I feel as though this is a great psychology essay and will be used in psychology 101 classes for generations to come. The essay describes how people are willing to do almost anything that they are told no matter how immoral the action is or how much pain it may cause.

In "The Perils of Obedience," Stanley Milgram conducted a study that tests the conflict between obedience to authority and one's own conscience. Through the experiments, Milgram discovered that the majority of people would go against their own decisions of right and wrong to appease the requests of an authority figure.

Everyday, people are forced to face with vicious circle of decisions: whether to stick to their morals or obey the authority figure. But it’s a fact that people have a propensity to obey authority, more than to preserve their own morals. A Few Good Men is a film that illustrates the struggle every marine faces-- to follow orders, good or bad. But why would marines follow the orders without hesitation if that order questions the principles they live by? Because the orders in the navy are meant to follow all for the reason of making everyone in Navy into good marines and to be strong enough to defend the nation. It required unquestioning commitment and obedience to orders. The articles, “The Perils of Obedience” by Stanley Milgram and “The

Stanley Milgram’s obedience study is known as the most famous study ever conducted. Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University, conducted an experiment that focused on the conflict between personal conscience and compliance to command. This experiment was conducted in 1961, a year following the court case of Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram formulated the study to answer the question “Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?” (Milgram, 1974). The investigation was to see whether Germans were specially obedient, under the circumstances, to dominant figures. This was a frequently said explanation for the Nazi killings in World War II.

The purpose of Stanley Milgram writing his “The Perils of Obedience,” is to show to what extent an individual would contradict his/her moral convictions because of the orders of an authority figure (Milgram 78). He constructed an experiment wherein an experimenter instructs a naïve subject to inflict a series of shocks of increasing voltage on a protesting actor. Contrary to Milgram’s expectations, about sixty percent of the subjects administered the highest voltage shock. (Milgram 80). According to Milgram, experiment variations disproved the theory that the subjects were sadists. (Milgram 85). Milgram states that although the subjects are against their actions, they desire to please the experimenter, and they often

Humanity will always question the idea of obedience. Two prestigious psychologists, Stanley Milgram and Philip G. Zimbardo, conducted practical obedience experiments with astonishing results. Shocked by the amount of immoral obedience, both doctors wrote articles exploring the reasoning for the test subjects ' unorthodox manners. In "The Perils of Obedience" by Milgram and "The Stanford Prison Experiment" by Zimbardo, the professionals reflect their thoughts in a logical manner. Milgram 's experiment consisted of a teacher, learner, and experimenter: the teacher was the test subject and was commanded to administer a shock by the experimenter. Upon switching the generator on, the learner-who was actually an actor-would jerk, cry, and occasionally seem unconscious. Expecting most subjects to stall the experiment, Milgram witnessed the exact opposite. Zimbardo, on the other hand, staged a mock prison, whereas half the subjects were guards and the other half were prisoners. Every test subject knew they were in an experiment and complied with the two week trial. However, the majority of the test subjects-particularly the guards-found themselves fitting into the mock prison all too well: abusing, insulting, and yelling obscenities at prisoners was commonplace, compelling many prisoners to appear insane. The driving force for immoral obedience is contributed to several factors: As seen in the film A Few Good Men by director Rob Reiner, when obedience causing harm undergoes

The foundation of today’s society is not in immense chaos or destruction, but rather in an organizational order because of the choice in obedience. As depicted in the movie, “A Few Good Men”, obedience is questioned due to soldiers choosing to obey or not when it presents the case of Lance Cpl. Harold Dawson and Pfc. Louden Downey being disciplined for committing a crime, even if they were only following orders. Eric Fromm, a social psychologist and psychoanalyst, furthers points in whether it is permissible to commit a crime under the pretext of obeying orders in his article, “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem”. Comparatively, Stanley Milgram, a Yale psychologist, addresses obedience overriding

“In the heart of nation’s capital, in a courthouse of the U.S government, one man will stop at nothing to keep his honor, and one will stop at nothing to find the truth.” This tagline helps to sum up the tone of the film A Few Good Men. Two soldiers caught in the middle of right and wrong will keep there hope and loyalty high as they wish for the best. Will the instigator of it all be pressured through his own anger to reveal the truth? Rob Reiner presents Col. Nathan R. Jessep as having an exaggerated self opinion while using his power for evil, based on dispositional factors.

Harold Dawson and Pfc. Louden Downey follow the order of Lt. Jonathon Kendrick from Col. Jessup to perform a Code Red on Pfc. William Santiago. Kelman and Hamilton note that "in an authority situation, individuals characteristically feel obligated to obey the orders of authorities, whether or not they correspond with their personal preferences" (Kelman &Hamilton 139). Humans are more likely to follow the orders of a superior or one who appears to be a superior ("When Good People do Bad Things). Rod Powers would develop that by stating in his article "Military Orders" that "military discipline and effectiveness is built on the foundation of obedience to orders" as well as courts have held military members accountable for their actions even while following orders (Powers). Szegedy- Maszak writes that psychologist Herbert Kelman explains that one of the three traits that contribute to one harming another is authorization (Szegedy- Maszak). If this information is true then Col. Jessup would act however he pleased due to the fact that he was the highest ranking official at the Guantanamo Bay Base in Cuba; he had no one to follow or hold him accountable to the ethics of a marine. As an authority figure, no one questioned his authority; Jessup knew that they could not question his order to perform a Code Red. For instance how Rajeev Purohit explains in "Alternatives to Obeying Superior Orders; A Question for the International Superior Court" "the defense of superior orders is impermissible (Purohit). As well as in Milgram's experiment the professor in the room seated behind the teacher giving the prods to continue with the experiment, the superior or the one trusted was the one the teacher relied on (Milgram 79). As one might conclude, humans seem to pick on the weak in life; however, this fear can be taken to an extreme and may be the beginning of dehumanization as well as other harmful

Even as people call themselves individuals and claim to do as they please, it is in their encoding to follow a simple command from a superior even if it objects their own judgement. In a simple experiment, such as that performed by Stanley Milgram, one command can make or break your own sense of self. Even if the command isn't compulsory, as seen by the marines in the movie A Few Good Men, orders can be extremely hard not to follow.

I choose to watch the movie “A few good men”. The story line goes as where Tom Cruise is asked to defend two marines who are charged with murder of a fellow officer. During the investigation it was found that the marines were ordered what they call a Code Red. A code red is where disciplinary measure is told to the marine when a member offends against his unit. This marine was beaten, gaged, bounded with tape by his fellow officers because in the squad’s eye he was not standing up to their needs. The two marines argue that they had a direct command from the higher authority to commit

In the movie, A Few Good Men, Daniel Kaffee’s co-council meets with multiple military personnel who in essence carry a sense of entitlement according to their rank in command. Kaffee’s highly skilled team provides strong evidence to prove the innocence of Dawson and Downey through the case of obedience to higher authoritative figures. Crispin Sartwell conveys his opinion throughout his open editorial, “A Genocidal Killer in the Mirror.” Sartwell discusses the qualities needed to manipulate a person to genocide, and the reasonings behind this manipulation (Sartwell 118). He also contributes a majority of his evidence towards retrospective events of which he explains through detailed events. Theodore Dalrymple, a British physician, attempts to create a reasonable balance between the necessity to obey and the circumstances where it is acceptable to disobey in, “Just Do What the Pilot Tell You.” He also utilizes the importance of parental upbringing to attribute the ability to obey in humans (Dalrymple 122). Erich Fromm, psychoanalyst, philosopher, historian, and sociologist, evaluates the varieties of obedience. Fromm also confronts the moral dilemma that contributes to our ability to obey or disobey (Fromm 123). In the movie, “A Few Good Men,” the issue of authoritative power based on rank has a prominent role, of which together Sartwell, Dalrymple, and Fromm logically discuss the reasoning for this theory.