During the agentic state an individual may feel moral strain, moral strain is when a person may be aware that the order they're following is immoral or goes against their moral views but they feel unable to disobey and continue the behaviour anyway. When in the agentic state the individual is acting as an agent for others, they do not feel responsible for their own actions as they believe responsibility falls to the authority figure giving the order. As this gives a clear description of obedience, society can learn from and aim to avoid future events similar to Mai Lai massacre. There has been much researcher into obedience through many studies including Milgram & Hofling, both these studies were lab experiments so any findings from the data would be considered high in validity and therefore any changes made to society from the theory would likely be worthwhile. However agency theory is more of a description than an evaluation of obedience, therefore the theory is incomplete and other theories, such as social power theory it is an alternative explanation for obedience, as a result of this any changes society makes on the basis of agency theory may be invalid and useless as the theory itself may be incorrect/incomplete.
The review board reviews research proposals and ensure that researchers protect participants adequately. Due to the debate and beliefs of some that Milgram's study was unethical and other similar research projects caused the Department of Health, Education and Welfare to establish regulations in 1974, for the protection of human subjects. First, to understand the reasoning behind the above action, we must look at the ethics of the Study of Obedience from two different view points. The author has given us two sides of the ethical debate from both Diana Baumrind and Stanley Milgram. To begin, we must understand the Hypothesis of Milgram's Study of Obedience.
Although the examination of the exclusionary rule may constitute deterrence for law enforcement, the rule still may be considered constitution although its existence (Zalman, M. (2011)). Rationale and Purpose of the Exclusionary Rule The exclusionary rule is separated into three parts. The first part needs an item to be physically collected as evidence. The second part is that the item of evidence has been collected by a governmental officer or a person temporary acting in their behalf, for example; confidential informants. Confidential Informants are told to do acts or buy thing that may be illegal, but they are doing it on behalf of the government (Zalman, M. (2011)).
Machiavelli has strongly persuasive arguments on leadership since he apprehends in his famous book ‘The Prince’ in chapter 17 the human nature very accurately. He reveals that how crucial it is for a prince being aware of the dangers within the city in order to achieve dominance in the state. He offers a possible threat to the prince as people’s in sincerity. Since human beings are inherently self-seeker and ungrateful, they may easily let down the prince in case of a dangerous situation. (Machiavelli 71) Therefore, when it comes to people’s benefits, the rupture of relations between the prince and his people may be broken.
Thoreau accuses society for being responsible for consuming the identity of people by preoccupying them with small details and of life, such as the government unjustly using people because they do not know anything different than to obey and conform. The government and society have taken over intellect and conscience, taking individualism as well. This lack of individualism and increased complexity of living is even more true in our world today than it was when Thoreau wrote these essays with concern about it. With technology booming the way it is and will continue to, people’s lives become more complicated and more is expected from them. They are being taken over by detail and spreading attention over many responsibilities instead of being able to focus on a few.
Erich Fromm Critique Essay In discussing obedience, people usually will think that obedience is the right thing to do, and disobedience is in the wrong. In Erich Fromm’s essay, “Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem”, he states that around different places, people all believe that the world we live in came about as an act of disobedience. In his argument, he states multiple examples taken from the Greek myth of Prometheus, and of Adam and Eve, with the Original Sin. Erich even assumes that the beginning of our race starts through disobedience: “[our] intellectual development was dependent on the capacity for being disobedient..”(Fromm 684) With this statement, Erich Fromm strongly argues his view that “human history began with an act of disobedience, and it is not unlikely that it will be terminated by an act of obedience.”(Fromm 683) In his article, Fromm discusses his reasoning for believing that history began with disobedience, and will end in obedience. Erich Fromm talks about the different kinds of obedience, and how they can help one’s society, or even destroy it.
Outline the findings of Zimbardo’s Stanford prison study and Milgram’s work on obedience and comment on the ethical issues in relation to these studies. Philip Zimbardo and Stanley Milgram are psychologists who both studied the influences of others on an individuals’ behaviour – Zimbardo looked at social factors and Milgram looked at how individuals behave when instructed to commit an act. Zimbardo’s studies on social behaviour stems from the definition of a social influence; a social influence is the process by which the behaviour of one person influences that of another (Zimbardo, P. 1991). It also deals with compliance; when people change their behaviour upon a request, in this case Zimbardo’s study. Zimbardo wanted to find out how ‘ordinary’ people would behave in a prison environment when designated roles as prisoners and guards so he conducted a group study at Stanford University, USA, with some male student volunteers.
However in its effort to strive for the seamless, utopian class structure the Party imposes a wide gap between the social classes. This is complimented and aided by the Party’s desire and ability to enforce their unilateral thinking and oppression. These methods of control are achieved in a number of different ways. The first method is the constant surveillance through the conversion of the right to privacy to a privilege enjoyed by the Inner Party. This is used to produce fear in the comrades under the control of the Party in order to ensure the ultimate compliance from these comrades.
There would be surveillance and terroristic policing to control people’s lives. They would use propaganda and manipulate all mass media to gain support and they would abolish civil society. This type of state is fascist inspired and some examples are Nazi Germany and Mussolini’s Italy. This type of state would be completely coercive with no individualism or freedom or rights. One theorist said about how the state is just armed bodies of men and coercion is the only option Another type of state which makes coercion an essential part is the collectivised state.
“The Perils of Obedience” Obedience is defined as dutiful or submissive behavior with respect to another person or group of people. It is usually referred to as a positive aspect, but in the case of “The Perils of Obedience” by Stanley Milgram, in which obedience to authority causes other people harm, it can easily be argued as an extremely negative factor. In defense of her personal opinion about Milgram’s experiment, Diana Baumrind wrote “Review of Stanley Milgram’s Experiments on Obedience” to demonstrate that obedience is not always the right action to partake in. Although the sources have extremely different views of obedience, they both have several of the same subtopics, including validity, sympathy, and conformity. In “The Perils of Obedience”, Milgram was trying to prove a point that shows how far someone will go to be obedient to the authority.