The Pros And Cons Of The Milgram Experiment

A while after receiving his doctorate, Milgram began studying the justifications of genocide, in particular the case of Adolf Eichmann. Eichmann was responsible for countless war crimes associated with the Nazis, however he claimed that him and all of his accomplices were simply following orders. A year after Eichmann’s trial, Milgram had set out to find the answer to his new found 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). It is this underlying question that supported the entire experiment, essentially a study focusing on the conflicts between obedience to authority and personal conscience. As in, would you harm a person if you were told to do so by someone with high authority? The experiments began in July of 1961, at Yale University, when Milgram began a search for participants, by publishing a short advertisement in a newspaper.

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

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

Stanley Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University, and other members of the community also questioned the nature of obedience. Milgram reflected back to the 1933 events of the Holocaust. Milgram began to question the intentions of the soldiers serving under Eichmann. Why would all those German soldiers go along with kill millions of innocent Jews, slaves, homosexuals, children, and gypsies? Were the soldiers just following the orders of Adolf Eichmann, leader of the German Army? Milgram was interested in doing the obedience to authority figures study because he questioned if Adolf’s men were just following his orders, and this lead to killing of eleven million innocent victims during the time period of the Holocaust. Milgram became enthusiastic in researching the limit that the average person would go to obey orders from their authority figures, even if that meant

Milgrams research sought had two determinants as reported by Blass (1998). First, Milgram attempted to account for the holocaust and secondly, he intended to use the Asch’s technique for studying conformity to behavior of greater human consequences. In this research study, it was found out that an average of group of men would readily inflict painful and electric shocks on harmless victims whose actions did not call for such harsh treatments. The

He had the participants believe that they were delivering painful and potentially harmful shocks to an innocent volunteer and not participating in a simulation. The researchers could observe how far the participants would go when given orders from a perceived authority figure in a potentially injurious situation. Without the deception, the participants wouldn’t be under the same type of duress, and therefore it wouldn’t accurately test his thesis that the Holocaust wasn’t caused by a few bad people but by common people blindly obeying authority figures (Lilienfeld, 2016, p427). The ethical implication of this type of deception comes from the evident distress that it caused the participants. The experiment showed that even though all participants delivered at least some shocks that none of them seemed to enjoy it and the participants who went to the full 450 Volts were clearly distressed by the situation (Blass, markrho, 2010, Sept, Milgram Obedience Study [Video File], Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W147ybOdgpE). It also removed the choice from the participant as to whether they were willing to be involved in the actual study, as they weren’t provided with all the information (Goh, A, 2017, Module 1 Slides [PowerPoint], Monash University, Retrieved from

A standout amongst the most renowned investigations of compliance in brain research was done by Stanley Milgram (Myers 499). Stanley Milgram was a therapist at Yale University, directed an analysis concentrating on the contention between acquiescence to power and individual still, small voice. He analyzed avocations for demonstrations of genocide offered by those blamed at the World War II, Nuremberg War Criminal trials (Myers 499). Their resistance regularly depended on "submission" - that they were simply taking after requests from their bosses. The trial testing started in July 1961, shortly a year after the trial of Adolf Eichmann located in Jerusalem (McLeod). Milgram conceived the analysis to answer the inquiry "Would it be able to be that Eichmann and his million assistants in the Holocaust were simply taking after requests? Would we be able to call every one of them accessories?" (McLeod).

Milgrim’s experiments has provided society with tons of insight on compliance and obedience. His studies have exposed the influence of situation factors on an individual’s behavior. This can readily be applied when discussing Nazi Germany, the people weren’t bad, they were just put into a bad situation. Adolf Hitler influence and the way he depicted the situation was enough to persuade a nation. Milgrim’s studies have also highlighted that individuals deploy valid justifications for there actions and are even willing to ignore opposing influences. These are all benefits to the field of psychology, but few sacrifices were made. Participants in the study were introduced to immense levels of discomfort, which lead to nervous tension; the most severe being an uncontrollable seizure.

Stanley Milgram was a psychology professor at Yale University, a prestigious school in Connecticut. He was interested in why so many German people in the 1930s and 1940s had followed instructions which involved causing pain or killing innocent human beings. His experiment on obedience to authority figures was a series of social psychology experiments that measured the willingness of study participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. Milgram first described his research in 1963 in an article published in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology.

However, Baumrind also argues that this experiment does an inadequate job of representing the feeling of the German soldiers. The German soldiers, Baumrind asserts, had believed that their actions they were just. And that their victims were subhuman (1964, p.423). Thereby these German soldiers had no reason to feel guilt in the acts they were carrying out. In Milgram’s study the subjects had concern for the victims that they were shocking and this was cause for distress in the

In “Perils in Obedience,” Stanley Milgram studied social forces and obedience. Milgram does this by having subjects think they are shocking individuals in a chair for getting wrong answers to questions asked by the subjects. The results showed the participants conformed to the authority of the researchers by going against their own morals and values. Milgram stated that “[t]hey suspected that only 4 percent would reach 300 volts, and that only a pathological fringe of about one in a thousand would administer the highest shock on the board”(362). He never thought that 60 percent of the subjects would have administered that high of a shock. Milgram connected his results to Nazi Germany and stated that:

The Milgram experiment illustrates people 's reluctance to confront those who abuse power. By recruiting and deceiving people of all different backgrounds, he manipulated them into using punishment on people’s ability to learn. The Milgram experiment helps psychologists and sociologists explain the reasoning behind knowingly conflicting pain for a certain outcome. Milgram contributed path-breaking experiments towards the research between obedience to authority. He furthered knowledge in social networks and urban psychology.

The Milgram experiment is probably one of the most well-known experiments of the psy-sciences. (De Vos, J. (2009). Stanley Milgram was a psychologist from Yale University. He conducted an experiment focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. Milgram wanted to investigate whether Germans were particularly obedient to authority figures as this was a common explanation for the Nazi killings in World War II. Milgram selected people for his experiment by newspaper advertising. He looked for male participants to take part in a study of learning at Yale University.

Many say that the reason an event like the Holocaust will never happen again is because no normal person would kill or hurt someone if given the chance. Stanley Milgram put this argument to the test. Milgram conducted an experiment focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. The people who were picked were based on a newspaper listing. All of the participants were regular ordinary people. When the