Experiencing traumatizing situations repeatedly, especially events as despicable as those witnessed by the men of Police Battalion 101, causes psychological issues and the mind must protect itself to survive; one way that an individual’s mind prevents mental break-downs is through desensitization. After viewing numerous executions, it is likely that the men became desensitized to the killing process. Stanley Milgram’s electroshock study presents another possible explanation for the men’s behavior: following orders and obeying authority are ingrained within most individuals. If an individual in an authority position orders some to complete a task, it is difficult not to comply, especially when all or most your peers take part. Social factors strongly impact many aspects of a person’s behavior and affected the men’s decisions to murder the
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
Milgram’s article proves Dawson and Downey’s argument to be true that they were just doing their job. The article by Milgram also provides an explanation for obedience as one harboring their own anger, which makes following orders that hurt someone else almost easy. In A Few Good Men, Dawson is
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).
Over time, the guards began to blindly follow their instructions, even if they were dehumanizing and mistreating the prisoners. The prisoners, in turn, became passive and resigned to their mistreatment. This experiment illustrates how even seemingly normal individuals can turn to evil when their individuality is compromised by societal pressure to
(What does the study add to our understanding of the phenomenon?) People are much more likely to obey someone of authority than expected, even if it is against their beliefs or morals. Something such as Hitler’s rise to power could have been just as possible in the United States because Americans are just as likely as the Germans to continue to do something that they know is
Murder or Mercy: Morality in the Human Brain “The human brain has 100 billion neurons, each neuron connected to 10 thousand other neurons. Sitting on your shoulders is the most complicated object in the known universe.” - Michio Kaku When reading such stimulating novels such as Lord of the Flies, the psychological mysteries of the human mind are often the first thing you notice, be it the ability to justify killing another human being or just the need to build a society in order to maintain humanity. The psychological deterioration in both Golding’s fictitious novel, Lord of the Flies, and Zimbardo’s in depth psychological study, the Stanford Prison Experiment, are similar in the character archetypes that emerge in the stressful situation and the results of a particular ethical code gaining authority.
Since the beginning of the human existence, man has always dominated and ruled over one another be it empires, corporations, or small groups. Authority and obedience has always been a factor of who we are. This natural occurrence can be seen clearly through the psychological experiments known as The Milgram Experiment and the Stanford Prison Experiment. Both of these studies are based on how human beings react to authority figures and what their obedience is when faced with conflict.
Renowned psychologist and social experimenter Stanley Milgram once said that “obedience is the psychological mechanism that links individual action to political purpose. It is the dispositional cement that binds men to systems of authority.” In other words, man succumbs to authority because it is rooted in his obedience to jurisdiction. An example of this is the American judicial system, which man is obedient to because that is what’s known. His political or societal purpose however is a learned behavior, or one that he matriculates from the dynamic of his culture.
Introduction Although we live in a time when we consider ourselves to be civilized human beings who value life and peace, acts of evil occur. Wars are waged and murders are committed every day. The aim of this paper is to explore and recognize what contributed to the atrocities and inflictions of pain that were committed by individuals, many of whom seemed like normal people with families and home lives. Asch’s experiments researched conformity and compliance, when one changes their behaviors to align with the beliefs of a group.
Human emotion is a powerful and complex experience that can influence individuals to go against the conventional morality of normal situations (Aho, 2013). Evidently, emotions can dominate a person to commit acts of violence, even the supposedly professional, rational, and disciplined individuals like police officers can inflict harm on others. The emotional dynamics of violent situations are found in the "pathways" that lead into the "tunnel of violence": attacking the weak victim; "forward panic"; and audience encouragement (Collins, 2008). It is through these pathways that came together at a particular time and place that shaped the tension, fear, and the emotional entrainment of the officers to act in ways they would normally not. Such emotional dominance is subject to many situational contingencies; therefore, some individuals who reach the peak of violence (overkill) will not necessarily remain there (Aho, 2013).
In 2012, CSM Schroeder spoke to Cadets at the Army Cadet Command George C. Marshall Awards and Leadership Seminar. He told them to “Know what your people are capable of and use them.” This is true for NCOs as well. “When the Army makes changes, I think a lot of time we over correct.” (S. Schroeder, personal communication, June 17, 2018)
The Monitor on Psychology article “What makes good people do bad things?” by Melissa Dittmann analyzes the results of the Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Stanford psychology professor Phillip Zimbardo in 1971 and discusses what the experiment can tell us about human nature and what causes humans to be evil. In the novel “Lord of the Flies” the author William Golding discusses the effects of the theories mentioned in the article by creating his own fictional experiment with children stranded on an island during a nuclear war. Throughout his novel Golding explores the focus of Dittmann’s article; that environments and situations can bring out the evil that is inside all of us. People can act good or bad depending on their environment, and these actions are not entirely their fault because when people are not held accountable for their actions their more violent natures are revealed.
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.
Arguably, one of the most well-known experiments regarding the tendency of humans to inflict harm upon strangers under orders from perceived authority figures is Stanley Milgram’s electric shock experiments in 1963 (Smith, Aquino, Koleva & Graham, 2014). The experiment was based on the Nuremberg Trials, wherein the Nazi soldiers on trial claimed that they were only following orders, and as such implied a lesser role in their crimes during the Holocaust. While there are many factors that influence injustice against a people, in this paper, the role of moral exclusion will be examined in detail in order to ascertain how those excluded from powerful groups by virtue of their lineage and race could then be subjected to significant harm, and perhaps
