The Milgram Experiment: Evil Consequences Of Society

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.

Ethical Guidelines that are Broken in Milgram's Study on Obedience The ethical guidelines suggest that debriefing the participants after the experiment is essential, which Milgram has done it thoroughly in order to reveal the aim and the true purpose of his study. Although he did not expect the out come of his research, but his ethics shows that the research is beneficial of understanding the welfare of World War II.

After viewing both Milgram’s experiment and the Stanford Prison experiment, I can say that I was disappointed - but not surprised - by the results of each study. Throughout history the rise of one individual’s power has altered the course of entire cultures - Hitler, Stalin, and the Kim Jongs being obvious examples of this. Another story detailing the dangers of such stratified social hierarchy and thirst for power is Lord of the Flies. Though gruesome, this book proves how one person’s quest for ultimate authority can lead to the downfall of the entire group. While subjects in Milgram’s experiment seemed more apprehensive towards carrying out their “duties,” it was disheartening to see most of them buckle under the false sense of authority. I believe the average citizen would tell themselves they weren't capable of going along with such atrocities, but this experiment just goes to prove how toxic unquestioned authority can be. When we perceive an individual to hold supreme power over ourselves, we allow their teachings to grip our moral compass in a stranglehold, preventing us from acting in a civilized, rational manner. This is especially apparent in the Prison Stanford experiment. Even though all members of the study knew it was just that - no more than a sociological experiment - they quickly fell down the slippery slope that is group conformity. This demonstrates the Thomas Theorem extraordinarily well - the prisoners thought they were less than the guards, so they

The Milgram Experiment violates three of the five principles outlined in the Five General Principles of Ethics. Milgram wanted to see if there was a connection between “the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience” (McLeod, 2007). Milgram’s hypothesis that he based his experiment on was “How the German people could permit the extermination of the Jews?” (Dan Chalenor, 2012). The first one that Milgram’s experiment violated was “Principle A: Beneficence and Nonmaleficence” which is where “psychologists strive to benefit those with whom they work and take care to do no harm” (Ethical principles, 2013, p. 3, para. 3). The second principle that was violated was “Principle B: Fidelity and Responsibility” which is where

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

The Milgram experiment was conducted in 1963 by Stanley Milgram in order to focus on the conflict between obedience to authority and to personal conscience. The experiment consisted of 40 males, aged between 20 and 50, and who’s jobs ranged from unskilled to professional. The roles of this experiment included a learner, teacher, and researcher. The participant was deemed the teacher and was in the same room as the researcher. The learner, who was also a paid actor, was put into the next room and strapped into an electric chair. The teacher administered a test to the learner, and for each question that was incorrect, the learner was to receive an electric shock by the teacher, increasing the level of shock each time. The shock generator ranged from

Likewise Tuskegee studies, the Milgram test was an endeavor to decide how those denounced at the Nuremberg Trials could legitimize their cases that they were just complying with the requests of the Nazi authority. The members who were enlisted as educators have been educated that the electric stun and the agonizing sounds they got notification from the understudies were really counterfeit. Truth be told, they were misdirected all through the entire procedure, however they wound up noticeably imperative instruments that found how human inner voice responds when a kindred individual experience torment that is caused by one's self. Besides, the analysis investigated how orders from an expert that asked for their aggregate submission influenced

A classic experiment on the natural obedience of individuals was designed and tested by a Yale psychologist, Stanley Milgram. The test forced participants to either go against their morals or violate authority. For the experiment, two people would come into the lab after being told they were testing memory loss, though only one of them was actually being tested. The unaware individual, called the “teacher” would sit in a separate room, administering memory related questions. If the individual in the other room, the “learner,” gave a wrong answer, the teacher would administer a shock in a series of increasingly painful shocks correlating with the more answers given incorrectly. Milgram set up a recorder

The Milgram Experiment is unethical in many aspects. First of all, Milgram should have explained the experiment to all of the subjects before they decided to participate. Secondly, the “teachers” of the experiment were placed in stressful situations and the experiment could have affected their mental health. The principal of beneficence was practiced throughout the experiment because the person in the background did not force the “teachers” to continue the experiment against their will. The person in the background told the “teachers” they could leave if they did not feel comfortable answering the questions. Also, none of the subjects were physically harmed in this social experiment. However, one could argue that the “teachers” were emotionally harmed during the experiment. As it turns out, most of the “teachers” in the experiment did experience a large amount of stress, but it not drastic. Technically Milgram did not execute the principal of nonmaleficence.

The ethical treatment with the Milgram Obedience Experiment was one of many, turning points in the stricter laws on human research. However, the experiment did lay a path for research into the psyche of human behavior and obedience, when coaxed under deviate authority figure. How far would we allow ourselves to participate in wrong doings, before morally stopping?

Ethics today investigate the examination about beguiling the individuals. Faultfinders moreover frequently raise the possible harm the examination did to the individuals. Every so often, this enthusiastic scarring continued for a significant long time and years after the examination, so investigating the Milgram Experiment ethics is a basic bit of science. Now a day, in this time and age, experiments have to get approve by a board of people, which is a great idea. That way we can avoid experiments like this, and people will not have to suffer long term side

A recent Pew poll shows there is an increasingly substantial amount of public disagreement about basic scientific facts, facts such as the human though process (Scientific American). People in today’s society believe that studies, for example the Stanley Milgram Experiments, are falsified and irrelevant. In “The Perils of Obedience” Stanley Milgram, an experienced psychologist at Yale, explains how the human mind reacts to commands when placed under extreme stress. However, Diana Baumrind, a clinical and developmental psychologist, disagrees with Milgram in her article “Review of Stanley Milgram 's Experiments on

Psychological research has been growing and developing new ways of studying human behavior, collecting knowledge and expanding our understanding of our nature. For instance, studies involving human subjects presented risks for violation of ethical research guidelines, by pushing the limits of human experience (Kim, 2012). Throughout history, there have been numerous studies that elevated this concern, such as the Milgram Experiment of 1963. One of the major ethical raised was that it lacked informed consent from the participants and eventually raised the issue of protecting human subjects. This paper examines the ethical compliance in psychological research and emphasizes the importance of ethics and professionalism by analyzing different

The Milgram experiment was an experiment performed to identify a darker side of a human behavior. The experiment started to see if mild electric shocks would make people memorize a list of things. The shocks increased as the experimental subject made mistakes and the scientist Stanly Milgram continued even after the subject got agitated. This experiment is compared with Enron's leadership' behavior because it seemed like the executives lost their sense of morality to keep the company look strong to the investors. The leadership was blinded with stocks and profits. It was was so bad that they let innocent people of California suffer for their profits and stability of the company. This behavior in no books is considered ethical leadership. Ken

All ethical issues that are involved in the Milgram study are deception, harm to the participants, and also the right of withdrawal. Deception played a big part in this study as Milgram was not honest about his study when he was explaining the details to his participants. He deceived the participants as he lied about the study being a memory and learning experiment and not an obedience experiment. Not only did he lie about the study being about obedience but also lied about the electric shocks given to the learners were fake and not real. Herrera (2001) states that by deceiving the participants it could cause harm to the participants, especially towards their self-esteem, as he made the participants believe that the electric shocks were real