Полнотекстовый поиск:
Где искать:
только в названии
только в тексте
слова в тексте
только заголовок

Рекомендуем ознакомиться

Остальные работы->Реферат
The Judge proves to be a noble man and I think the choice he made was the right one. A man who has been with married for 30 years show great loyalty. ...полностью>>
Остальные работы->Реферат
The fulfillment of the need for love and belonging begins with a close family relationship. Melony’s malice and resentment towards others inhibits her...полностью>>
Остальные работы->Реферат
The early 1800’s were an unusual time in the history of the United States. A country in its infancy, growing, turbulent, and filled with intrigue wher...полностью>>
Остальные работы->Реферат
The book starts out with Ian Malcolm, a mathematician who had already had an experience with live dinosaurs a couple of years ago on another island. H...полностью>>

Главная > Реферат >Остальные работы

Сохрани ссылку в одной из сетей:

Stanley Milgram S Experiments On Obedience Essay, Research Paper

Obedience is a basic part in the structure of society, and its destructiveness has been questioned throughout time. Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment to test the destructiveness of obedience; however, Diana Baumrind discredits Milgram and criticizes his experiments in her article Review of Stanley Milgram s Experiments on Obedience.

Baumrind s commentary discusses how Milgram s experiments could not make a difference in society claiming that the subjects experienced emotional harm and the procedures were carried out in an environment which could have influenced the results. Milgram s experiments were an attempt to discover the control authority has over society.

Milgram wanted to test the level of obedience in society by seeing how much pain a person would inflict on another because they were given orders. The experiment was conducted at Yale University inside a laboratory. The tests consisted of a teacher who is the subject, a learner who is an actor, and an experimenter who gives the orders. The teacher gives the learner shocks, increasing the voltage with each wrong answer, while the experimenter

watches. The learner protested the shocks by screaming and yelling. Throughout the experiments, many of the subjects argued with the authority figure due to the harm they were inflicting on the learner, but did not stop the tests fearing that they would seem disrespectful. Some of the subjects were happy with the experiment thinking they were a step which could lead

to scientific knowledge. Those that were upset with the experiment thought that due to the learners protests nothing was accomplished. A survey was taken before the experiment to see how far people thought the subjects would go. Many people believed that the subjects would be disobedient, but the results were different. Many of the subjects were actually obedient throughout the experiment. Milgram concluded that many people were able to carry out

destructive deeds because they were following orders. By obeying orders and participating in the experiment, the subjects experienced emotional harm.

Baumrind believes Milgram s treatment of the subjects was unethical; as a result, the subjects were changed, but not society. Each subject chose to participate in the experiment expecting that the psychologist would have some concern for them; however, this was not the case with Milgram and his subjects. The subject first endured emotional harm by having to inflict the learner with shocks despite his protests. Afterwards, during a conference with the experimenter, the subject was informed that there was no electrical current. The subject then feels foolish, his mind weakens, and he loses self-esteem. Milgram claims that the subject was returned to the proper state of mind after the experiment. Baumrind finds that the emotional harm endured was great and Milgram s claim that he dissipated their harm was hard to believe

(Baumrind 376). The subjects entered the experiment with hopes of being a part of discovering scientific knowledge, but left feeling foolish realizing that they were the ones being tested. Society was not changed, just the subjects. The subjects would no longer answer to authority the same way; as a result of the pain they endured and the authoritative laboratory setting.

Baumrind asserts that a laboratory setting did not accurately represent society; therefore, the experiments could not have made an impact on the public. The unfamiliar setting causes the subject to be more submissive than usual society. The subject volunteered himself to the tests; therefore, he knows he should follow through with the experimenter s orders. Milgram

concluded that by being obedient one could carry out evil deeds, such as Nazi Germany (Milgram 371). Baumrind finds his conclusion does not represent society or Nazi Germany, but only the behavior of his subjects within a laboratory.

Baumrind s article justifies her claims that the subjects endured emotional harm and the setting caused the subjects to be submissive. These points make Milgram s experiments seem unconvincing. Society was not accurately represented; therefore, there was no overall impact on

human nature. One could question how long the subjects endured pain after the experiment. The article implies, but never supports, that the subjects had emotional harm for a lengthy duration after the experiment. One could not know the emotional effect the experiment had on the subjects without a direct consultation with them. By following up on the subjects, the article

could have been more effective. Even with this weakness, the lack of influence the experiment had on society was accurately represented.

According to Diana Baumrind, Milgram s tests could not have accurately represented society. Little scientific knowledge was gained due to the setting and the negative effects experienced by the subjects. Baumrind s findings discredit Milgram and imply that society and science were not changed. The only thing that the experiment changed was the subjects attitude

towards authority. Baumrind reveals that even though the destructiveness of obedience has always been questioned, experiments such as Milgram s would never find the answer.

Загрузить файл

Похожие страницы:

  1. Was Milgram Ethical In His Obedience Studies

    Реферат >> Остальные работы
    ... Milgram Ethical In His Obedience Studies? Essay, Research Paper Was Milgram Ethical in his Obedience ... weather or not Stanley Milgram?s experiment on obedience vs. destructive obedience is ethical you ... ethics was laid upon Stanley Milgram, weather or not he ...
  2. Dangers Of Obedience Essay Research Paper Most

    Реферат >> Остальные работы
    Dangers Of Obedience Essay, Research Paper Most of us ... problems. Numerous experiments conducted by a famous psychologist named Stanley Milgram also reveal the ... our society is facing. Milgram’s experiments on obedience reflect my thoughts about the ...
  3. Mindless Humans Essay Research Paper Humans have

    Реферат >> Остальные работы
    ... been socially networked with each other since the time ... pressures and authoritative figures. Stanley Milgram studied at Harvard University and ... 2000 Nssani, Moti. ?Review on Stabley Milgram?s Experiments on Obedience.? Writing Two Reader. Grafikarts: ...
  4. Obedience Essay Research Paper Comparison Contrast EssayIn

    Реферат >> Остальные работы
    ... Essay In “The Perils of Obedience” by Stanley Milgram, Milgram explains that obedience ... is a natural occurring behavior, which acts on ... . (Zimbardo 374).” Milgram’s experiment was in a fake ...
  5. Conformity And Obedience Essay Research Paper Conformity

    Реферат >> Остальные работы
    Conformity And Obedience Essay, Research Paper Conformity and Obedience The desire to ... Stanley Milgram and Philip Zimbardo conducted to explain conformity and obedience. Solomon Asch s experiment ... can have a profound effect on individuality. One s desire to ...

Хочу больше похожих работ...

Generated in 0.0019710063934326