Analyzing the Milgram Experiment

¶ … horrors of war have been discussed by researchers and historians for decades. Ever since the first and second world wars, people have wondered how others could commit the acts they did for as long as they did. The Nazis for example, did atrocious things to the Jewish people and continued to do so until the end of World War II. The selected study, the Milgram Experiment or the Milgram Obedience Study, demonstrates how people could commit such heinous acts merely on the basis of obeying an authority figure.

That is to say, roughly 65% of people are prone to obeying orders from an authority figure regardless of what personality traits they have and perform any act asked of them. The Milgram Experiment examined why people obeyed authority figures. It was a series of social psychology experiments involving painfully shocking participants for getting wrong answers. The study was conducted by psychologist Stanley Milgram.

While participants administering the shocks believed they were testing someone, in reality, the study focused on them, showing whether or not these demands placed on them would be followed or not. The range of participants were diverse and came from a variety of occupations and had varying levels of education.

Although a few of the participants did not obey because they found shocking a human being for more than 150 volts was inhumane, 65% of them did indeed go all the way to 450 volts and continued to flip the switch even if they showed no desire to perform the task. 26 of the participants flipped the 450-volt switch three times.

Although some stuttered, sweated, bit their lips, and protested, they did the last part of the study demonstrating that people can perform what would be considered evil acts if under the role of subordinate. The study reveals people are predisposed to a certain level of obedience and will obey anyone they perceive as an authoritative figure.

Not all the participants obeyed, but considering the situations people are placed in, for example Nazis in Germany, perhaps more than 65% would have committed these kinds of acts, merely to avoid punishment themselves and/or more willingness to obey a higher authority figure. When discussing different states of consciousness, it brings to mind what they mentioned in the video about participants willing to do something when the responsibility falls on the authority figure, not the subordinate.

People almost remove themselves entirely when they commit acts regarded as evil by simply altering consciousness and placing all responsibility for the suffering endured by the victim on someone else. This happens frequently with abuse victims and abusers. The abuser will or cannot recall the acts they committed and simply say it never happened or they say they were not in their right mind. Another thing that was interesting was one man who experienced laughing fits while administering the painful electric shocks.

He kept laughing as if he was trying to keep himself from feeling what was happening to the man and to him in that situation. This could represent an altered state of consciousness. Some even had seizures, providing another hint at this kind of phenomenon. Psychological disorders sometimes show people experiencing an outer-body moment where they see themselves performing something, like a fugue state. Many criminals have used this kind of defense when attempting to explain their crimes. "I don't remember.

I just woke up with a knife in my hand. I was outside of my body when it happened. I couldn't control myself." Whatever kind of logic they apply to their actions; they always seem to express an altered state of mind. Whether or not it is valid is another thing. The Milgram Experiment brings to mind the concept of situationism. A 1991 study remarks on situational determinants of obedience and how these play a part in willingness to commit certain acts as well as taking into account personality measures.

Some people for example, are far more docile and submissive than others who may not be as willing to obey. However, situationism does not take into personality measures as main determinants, rather, situations.

A focused review of the relevant research on the Milgram paradigm reveals that the evidence on situational determinants of obedience is less clear than is generally recognized; contrary to the commonly held view, personality measures can predict obedience; another kind of dispositional variable, enduring beliefs, is also implicated in the obedience process; and approaches suggested by interactionist perspectives can provide some integration of the literature (Blass, 1991, p. 398). Essentially, people were willing to do something regardless of their.