There is a moral difference between Shelton’s killing of his attackers and that of his other victims. Darby and Ames caused personal harm to Shelton and thus gave him the moral right to try and prevent any other future pain that could be caused by these men, but the other victims were combatants in the war that Shelton waged against the “system”. When looking at Darby and Ames, Shelton takes a more utilitarian approach when dealing with their killings. The government “system” is supposed to punish those who are wrong. But in the trial of Darby and Ames, only Ames was punished severely while Darby was allowed to go free.
December 8, 2011 A Comparative Critique of “The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror” and “The Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal: Sources of Sadism” The subject of obedience to authority to the point where a human would cause physical harm to another human has been greatly debated among modern critics. In his article “The Genocidal Killer in the Mirror”, Crispin Sartwell suggests that the average ordinary citizen will participate in mass genocide. In contrast, “The Abu Ghraib Prison Scandal: Sources of Sadism” by Marianne Szegedy-Maszak focuses on the response of soldiers in the military to their superiors. Both articles cover ground dealing with man’s response to social consensus and obedience. In contrast, however, Sartwell’s article focuses primarily upon the civilian aspect of obedience, whereas Szegedy-Maszak focuses more upon the military aspect.
In Stanley Milgram’s experiments, people torn between obeying an experimenter and responding to another’s pleas to stop the shocks usually chose to obey orders, even though obedience supposedly meant harming the other person. People were most likely to obey when the person giving orders was nearby and was perceived as a legitimate authority figure; when the person giving orders was supported by a prestigious institution; when the victim was depersonalized or at a distance; and when no other person modeled defiance by
Melissa Hughes W131 22320 Comparative Analysis Rough Draft Obedience to Authority Obedience is the state, fact, or instance of obeying, or a willingness to obey; submission. Most people do not think about obedience as much more than doing what they are told; they do not try to see what the outcome of their actions; they unconsciously comply. Blind obedience to authority can be defined as what people do when they think laws should be obeyed just because the law exists. Such unconscious failure to think about their actions “because we have always done it this way”; “because my boss said so”; “because it’s the law”; “because I was only following orders”; leads them to commit morally corrupt acts. They commit these acts believing that they are doing nothing wrong because they are following the law.
In 1964 he was awarded the American Association for the Advancement of Science's (AAAS) prize for research, and his work was seminal for psychological studies about obedience to authority. However, his experiments were also highly criticized for being unethical. Diana Baumrind was one of the first to argue that Milgram's experiment did not provide adequate measures to protect participants from the stress and realization that they were capable of brutal actions; that the entire experiment should have been terminated at the first indication of discomfort in the participants; and that because of the intensity of the experience, participants would be alienated from future participation in psychological research. Others, such as H. C. Kelman, argued that the use of deception in these experiment were not necessary because other, non-deceptive methods could have obtained similar results. Milgram defended his work, arguing that adequate measures were indeed taken to protect participants; participants could withdraw from the study at any time; and that the deception was explained at the conclusion of the experiment.
If we do not show these freedoms to people of other countries, then we do our whole country a dishonor. Torture to an enemy of the United States by the military or by any of the other Agencies is wrong and against our own laws and treaties. Our own military’s lawyers have even expressed concern over the use of torture of prisoners. The Judge Advocacy General’s Corps
In the Abu Ghraib prison scandal of 2004, Iraqi prisoners were interrogated where accounts of psychololgical, physical and sexual abuse, including torture, rape and homicide. This “form” of interrogation was practiced my U.S. military police at the prison. Although the solders are responsible for there actions they where under strict orders that went against the Geneva convention conduct of war. When the scandal surfaced the U.S. government denied all knowledge and participation and blamed the solders. After comparing the Abu Ghraib schandle and the Milgram experiment its easy to see that the government had a big roll in influencing soilders.
The Nisei was one of the generations that experienced Internment camps more. On the other hand the public had different opinions. They thought that everything the government was right in everything like for example he told them that they were spys the public would believe them. Fear was another important thing that the civilians and public felt because they were scared of being invaded and another secret attack. People didn’t know what to expect or what to
These experiments offer a powerful and disturbing look into the power of authority and obedience. Milgram’s experiment explains how far people will go in pleasing their authority figure even if it means ignoring their own beliefs and morals. Because the two Marines are brought into situation where obedience is expected, even when it goes against personal morals, Dawson and Downey were ordered to perform an illegal act called “Code Red,” which requires them to assault a fellow Marine. In A Few Good Men, two Marines, LCpl Dawson and PFC Downey, are order to do a “Code Red” by Lt Kendrick. Kendrick was previously been ordered by Col Jessup.
The other actors that are responding to the Milgram Experiment are : The learner, the teacher, and the person who is conducting the experiment. The learner’s interests are to obey the teacher’s orders and to receive punishment from wrong doing. The teacher’s interests are to give the learner punishment for not answering the questions correctly. This shows how when someone is given orders they will do them, even if they were wrong or not. This is exactly what the Nazi troops or the Germans had to do to obey their higher power.