Obiedience to Authority

Throughout ones life, there are many instances in which obedience to authority is a necessary event. From childhood to death, there is always some sort of authority figure governing one's obedience to a set of rules or demands. Whether it is a parent, teacher, manager, or the government, there is always somebody to answer to with the power to carry out punishment for disobedience. Often, the superior in the situation is doing nothing other than looking out for the best interests of the person involved, or the bigger establishment as a whole. But in other rare occurrences, the orders being handed down may result in unjust behaviors and questionable use of tactics, as well as adverse results. Many times, the person, by acting out on these orders, is faced with moral and social dilemmas that can result in trauma and future punishment for the said individual. This can clearly be seen throughout American history with experiments that have been conducted on Americans, not of notoriety, but belonging to the larger majority of average citizens.

In 1963, Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment that forced participants either to violate their conscience by obeying the immoral demands of an authority figure or to refuse those demands (Milgram 313). Within his article, "The Perils of Obedience," Milgram describes the experiment that he conducted and the varying outcomes that he witnessed. Milgram began the experiment with two people, one of which is the study subject, while the other is an actor that is involved with Milgram to help in the study. The actor is placed in a room and hooked up to a machine that the test subject believes will give the actor a shock for giving incorrect answers to test questions. There are varying, and increasing levels of shock for progressively wrong answers. The plan of the test is to see what the test subject will do as the experiment progresses. Many different people were surveyed prior to the test to form an opinion of the probable outcome. During this survey, most people believed that the subject would not carry out the punishment after a certain shock level was reached, but the test proved otherwise, showing that most people will continue under pressure from the authority figure to the maximum shock level.

Various forms or patterns of authority can be seen all throughout society. In "Opinions and Social Pressure," an article by Solomon Asch, this can be seen very clearly. Asch states, "that social influences shape every persons practices, judgments, and beliefs is a truism to which anyone will readily assert" (Asch 306). In an experiment conducted by Asch and his colleagues a group of men are put into a room and told to match lines on two different papers of the same length. All goes well for the first two rounds, until all members except one start to give incorrect answers on purpose. As the experiment progressed, the member giving correct answers all along began doubting himself, and eventually under pressure, began to agree incorrectly with the group (Asch 309).

A second experiment was conducted in 1973 by Philip G Zimbardo, and published in the New York Times Magazine, on April 8, 1973. The article entitled, "The Stanford Prison Experiment" raised troubling questions about the ability of individuals to resist authoritarian or obedient roles, if the social setting required