Stanley Milgram: Obey at Any Cost - Essay Example

Obey at Any Cost
Stanley Milgram was the psychologist responsible for coming up with a very controversial study that raised a lot of issues in the use of human subjects in psychological research. From the recruitment of subjects, he already used deception in using a misleading title for his research. This idea sprung from his curiosity of how soldiers committed vicious atrocities during World War II, and in general, the inhumanity displayed by people as a result of obeying orders from ruthless leaders in the course of history.

Milgram wanted to test out his theory that humans tend to obey those in a position of power or authority over them even if obeying will mean going against their principles, codes of moral and ethical behavior.

An “experimenter” conducting the study was actually a confederate of Milgram, egged on the subject to continue with the task at hand no matter how the “student/ learner” subject reacted. The whole scenario that was played was just simulated without the knowledge of the actual subject. Unaware that everything and everyone around him is not real, he and his emotions and behavior are the only ones that are.

Surprisingly, out of the 40 subjects, 65% followed the experimenter’s orders all the way to the top of the shocking scale. Most of them exhibited manifestations of extreme stress in doing so, sincerely uncomfortable doing the task while witnessing the suffering of the student subject. To ease their anxiety, the subjects were “debriefed” after the experiment. The purpose of the experiment was revealed to them along with unmasking the accomplices and confederates to introduce themselves. The subjects were interviewed regarding the feelings they went through. Milgram explains why the subjects continued to obey the experimenter even if they knew that they were responsible for hurting a fellow human being. Justifications from the point of view of the subjects included that the subjects trusted that the experiment was sponsored by Yale, a highly credible institution; the goals of the research was important; their participation was vital to the study, and they were being paid for it, so they had to do their part. Additional rationalizations were: it was not their fault that the learner subject drew the lot that indicated he will be the learner and they were told that the shocks are painful but not dangerous.

Replications of the study using subjects of different demographics yielded the same results. It was also found out that the level of obedience depended on the distance the subject had between him and the learner and between him and the experimenter. The closer the subject was to either one, the higher the level of obedience. This dropped when the distance between him and the learner or experimenter increased.

Critics raised their concern about the treatment of human subjects and the issue of deception in experiments. More than the implications of the study on obedience, Milgram’s research was extremely influential in the area of the ethical treatment of human subjects since they were placed in situations out of their control, and caused severe emotional reactions.

The shocking results of the experiment questioned the integrity of the value of obedience. Children are reared to obey their parents and authority figures, and most of the time, it is not processed to them that they need to use their good judgment on which orders to obey. Consideration for the welfare of others may be placed on a lower priority than the value of obedience.

Two questions worth pondering are raised by this reader:
1. Is the strong emphasis on obedience to authority undermining a person’s own discernment to do what he thinks is right?
2. Should the policy of “blind obedience” trained in soldiers be amended with a standardized decision-making grid for soldiers to learn to think for themselves in times of crises and there is no authority to obey?

Milgram’s research is a classic example of a study that makes one think deeper than the results it yielded. It forces one to look into his own value system to determine what is really important in his life.