(I know this is a massive read, but I think it will be worthwhile. We've all heard reasons for why the Holocaust happened, in other words, how humans can be driven to such atrocities. This experiment may reflect a large part of why this has happened.)
Here is the experiment laid out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experimentQuote:
Born in New York City in 1933, Stanley Milgram was educated at Queens College and then received his Ph.D. from Harvard. As a social psychologist, he did research at Yale University where, from 1960 to 1963, he performed one of the most shocked and important experiments ever made on human behavior. His own account of it is reprinted here. His experiments revealed the extent to which ordinary people like you are ready to torture and kill other innocent people simply out of obedience to authority.[/b]
The results were very interesting!
***
1. If someone in authority asked you to hurt and perhaps even kill an innocent human being, would you obey? If you are like most people, you probably think you wouldn’t. But if you are like most people, you probably would. Why?
Whenever we are told by authority to do something to another person, we feel as though the moral consequences of obeying lie in the hands of the commander, not in the one who obeys. Once we have relinquished the weight of morality and accept that obedience is a virtue, we can be driven to commit atrocities.
2. Milgram is concerned with “the extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority.” What is his evidence? How do you account for this behavior?
In Milgram’s experiment, it is disturbing that most people continued to the highest shock level instead of stopping. Even when the victims of the shocks screamed and protested, the “subjects” went on to the last shock level of 450 volts. As I said above, we accept that the authority bears responsibility and the one obeying is just doing what he is told.
3. What are the “binding factors” that make people obedient?
Even when the subject is an agent of a destructive process, he or she will continue to administer the shocks. The subject may feel an obligation to the experimenter telling them what to do, so withdrawal from their promise may feel awkward. The subject may also feel the need to retain his relationship with the superior authority. This probably happens often when acting against individuals who are perceived to be “lower” in social status, especially when being told by someone credible or “high up”. Another mechanism is the subject getting so absorbed in the task at hand that they disregard moral conflict. Subjects become immersed and want to put on a good performance without considering the consequences of their actions.
4. What does Milgram mean by “counteranthropomorphic”?
Counteranthropomorphism is the tendency to of someone to attribute human qualities to inanimate objects. The experimenter may coerce the subject to go on and the subject will think, “The Experiment must continue.” The victim being shocked is now seen only as a concomitant of the experiment, and if the experiment continues, the victim must continue to be as well.
5. What does Milgram say is the most fundamental lesson of his study?
Ordinary citizens with no prior hostility on their part become part of a degenerative process by being told by authority. Even when the destruction is overt, few people have the capacity to override the commands of authority.
6. Does Milgram think that the problem of obedience is just psychological? What else does he think is involved?
Milgram thinks the problems also lies in the structure of society. During WWII, even Eichmann was sickened when he saw the concentration camps. All he had to do to commit mass murder was to shuffle papers. The person who actually filled the gas chamber probably felt he was just doing his duties and moral responsibility belonged to whoever was giving him orders. We can see that this break in command can have everyone point their fingers at authority (who do as well) so that horrendous acts of immorality can be committed without being impeded by anyone within.
7. What light do you think Milgram’s work sheds on the psychological forces at work behind the Nazi Holocaust? The slaughter of Native Americans? War in general?
The military is based on the chain of command. As we have seen, whenever labor is divided among individuals to achieve some goal, the inexplicitness of moral consequence grows with increasing complexity along with breaks in the chain of command. During the Holocaust, devaluation prior to action against the Jews led people to accept the pogrom even more. This combined with humans’ natural obedience to authority under one man’s idea made the situation almost inevitable.
8. An American soldier tells why he and his buddies massacred Vietnamese men, women, and children at My Lai: “Because I felt like I was ordered to do it, and…at the time I felt like I was doing the right thing…. They were begging and saying, ‘No, no.’…the mothers…hugging their children…we kept on firing….” (New York Times, November 25, 1969.) How does whose side you’re on affect how you feel and react?
The American soldiers said they were doing what they were told [by authority], and at the time, it seemed like the right thing to do. If you’re [in a war] on the side that is more dominant than the opposing side, it is probably easier to carry out your authority’s wishes than the walk away which requires willpower. In Milgram’s experiment, all the subjects had to do to obey their authority was to push a button. At the time, the subjects may have felt it was better to simply obey which required less effort than resisting.
9. If obedience to authority is the problem, what do you suppose is the solution? Without obedience wouldn’t there be chaos, anarchy? How do you know when to obey?
Aristotle said we should disobey authority if there is a conflict with our morality and conscience. Anarchy is not a good alternative, so we must use our will to disobey, whether the problem is intractable or not.
