Christopher Browning believes it to be highly unlikely that Nazi officials could have predicted the men of the Reserve Police Battalion would become so equipped to carryout mass genocide do to the fact that the men in the battalion hoped to pursue a career in the Hamburg Police to avoid being drafted into the Army. They were specifically attempting to avoid participating in the atrocities of war. Although the answer may forever be without doubt, Browning argues that the men of the Reserve Police Battalion didn’t want to be rejected, isolated or have the reputation of weak within the battalion. Thus, around 80% of the men successfully carried out their orders, developing brutal tactics and getting more and more comfortable with murder each and every
In “The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror”, Crispin Sartwell argues that the average citizen can be convinced to commit atrocious crimes under the right circumstances from the premise that the traits to become a genocidal killer are not that uncommon, using examples from recent history such as the Holocaust in Nazi Germany and the Rwandan Genocide. Sartwell clarifies that although most people delude themselves into thinking that they wouldn’t partake in genocide if they were placed in a similar situation as many have before, it would take a “moral hero” (Sartwell 118) to refuse the opportunity given the circumstances. On the other hand, in “Just Do What the Pilot Tells You”, author Theodore Dalrymple claims that people's response to authority in respect to their obedience is what leads the average man to kill countless others. While both authors address the fact that it doesn’t take a malicious person to engage in genocide, Sartwell focuses more on the qualities that people who commit genocide commonly share, Dalrymple seems more concerned on how people react to authority in
Title (psychology #7) In the Abu Ghraib Torture and the Milgram experiment even though they had different reasoning behind it, the same concept is behind it. The obedience to authority people tend to have is either to obey or disobey authority and do what they think is right. In both this situation many people decided to obey authority and break their morals.
Ian Parker, author of “Obedience”, provides accurate depictions of the immediate and long-term effects of Dr. Stanley Milgram’s Experiment. In addition, he includes that under complex situations, individuals are easily induced to react through a destructive manner (Parker103). Americans commonly underestimate the influences of a situation; however, Parker thoroughly delineates the consequences behind blind obedience (Parker 104). Herbert C. Kelman and V. Lee Hamilton, authors of “The My Lai Massacre: A Military Crime of Obedience” construe the atrocity of blind obedience committed by the United States Military. In March of 1968, crimes of obedience occurred due to an elusive order commanded by a higher ranked officer (Kelman&Hamilton 131).
The notion that the soldiers don’t have the ability to make choices for themselves
Jeff McMahan probes the morally-provocative question, “is morally permissible for an individual to join the armed forces if he will thereby become an “unjust combatant?” I will present two arguments to debate this question, epistemic justification and pacifism. I will implore the use of Reserve Police Battalion 101 as a historical example to support my conclusion that epistemic justification, or the moral permissibility for a man to join the armed forces in defense of an unjust cause, as the stronger of the two arguments. Before progressing any further, it is imperative to have a foundational understanding of “just combatants” and “unjust combatants,” as McMahan understands theses terms.
Dawson follows through with the order and even orders Downey to assist him. In the article, “The Perils of Obedience,” author Stanley Milgram believes that obedience is “deeply ingrained" in every being. This implies that when someone of authority demands something be done, it will be done. The same idea is presented in the article, “The My Lai Massacre: A Military Crime of Obedience,” by Herbert C. Kelam and V. Lee Hamilton. This article provides evidence that soldiers are more than willing to perform any act, no matter if the order is unethical or unclear.
Every time I decide to watch the news, there always seems to be a story about an officer of the law shooting an innocent victim. This problem never truly resonated with me until reading an article about “The Myth of Police Reform.” Throughout this editorial there are countless examples of incidences where police intervention should be deemed unnecessary. There are some scenarios where extreme force may be needed, but a majority of them do not. Ta-Nehisi’s editorial supports this, even though it may have a few drawbacks related to the ethos, but he still manages to support his main claim with sufficient logos and pathos.
How does an ordinary group of people turn into bloodless killers? The author of Ordinary Men, Christopher Browning offers the most captivating argument towards how it is possible for ordinary men to commit extraordinary atrocities. This paper will analyze the different viewpoints of what caused ordinary men to commit murder. To better understand this issue one must understand the sides of argument.
The Holocaust is still a heavily reviewed subject and is debatably one of the worst if not the worst atrocity that has happened on this Planet up to date. To think that the Nazi’s were able to kill millions of people it has made us question what kind of people they were and if they were anything similar to us. It is hard to think of a perpetrator to be a normal human being. The Holocaust has made us question if the Nazi’s had any sense of moral sensibility when killing innocent and defenseless Jewish men and women. In the book Ordinary Men, Author Christopher Browning argues that these Nazi’s especially referring to the Reserve Police Battalion 101 were normal people who had instructions given by Hitler and their government to follow through with by devaluing all Jewish life.
Deception from a moral viewpoint would be something that is seen as wrong, but in a study or experiment for research I think deception is something that is necessary to gain certain knowledge that we wouldn 't be able to gain using regular methods. Usually, the ends justify the means to a deceptive experiments and they usually have good intentions behind them. Many people may be angry after the experiment is over but it is shown that people enjoy an experiment with deception more than an experiment without deception; and people also benefit from them more, educationally. I believe deception is a necessary tool for learning about human behavior and human reaction. Deceptive experiments are experiments that really make you think when the experiment
The groupthink, or group mentality theory occurs when the majority of the group follows a certain ideal or idea, and causes individuals who might have thought otherwise to support the majority’s conclusions. This has never been more prevalent then in one of the most horrifying events in history: the Holocaust. The events of the Holocaust baffled the world – no one could understand how Hitler convinced thousands of German soldiers to murder millions of innocent Jewish citizens. The world could not understand how a sophisticated and refined European country could follow a mindset that systematically eradicated generations of people for the sole reason that they practiced a certain religion (Tindale, Munler, Wasserman & Smith, 2002). The largest contributor to the events that took place during the Holocaust are the effects of conformity.
Milgram himself concluded how easily ordinary people ‘can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority". (Milgram 1974) As this report has highlighted the research is not without controversy with many questioning to what extent Milgram’s experiment is true to real life and has been criticized for not highlighting further situational variables in determining obedience to authority. Regardless of this, there is no doubt Milgram highlighted a rather troubling phenomenon.
Undoubtedly, militaries around the world train individuals to do extremely violent things to other humans. Often times transitioning away from a high tempo, hyper violent environment back to civilian life is a difficult process. William C. Gentry, a San Diego County prosecutor was once quoted saying “You are unleashing certain things in a human being we don’t allow in civic society, and getting it all back in the box can be difficult for some people.” Andrew Chambers is a veteran who had such problems adjusting. During a night out with some friends, Chambers severely beat someone who had pulled out a knife during an argument.
Introduction Human history is abundant in examples of individuals who have amassed such power with themselves that have allowed them to control entire populations, and often unleash tyranny and oppression upon millions of people. Throughout history there have been individuals who have held an iron grip over entire nations, concentrating totalitarian power with themselves, denying any freedom to people, crushing any form of dissent, and often unleashing mass violence, terror, and in some cases genocide. These people have shaped the future of peoples, regions and continents, starting wars and conflicts, and determining the course of millions of lives. And because of this very fact, that a single person could such a huge impact over the lives of so many people, it is very important to study the very factors that caused these individuals to make the decisions that they did, specifically, the factors and that shaped up the personality of these
