Book Reading: Obedience to Authority

Obedience to Authority: Stanley Milgram

Chapter 1:
In chapter one, Stanley Milgram introduces the research experiment that this book studies. The research study uses a random participant to ask questions to another participant and shock them when they get answers wrong. For each additional wrong answer, the voltage is increased. The participant getting shocked is actually a paid actor, who is faking the shocking. The purpose of the study is to see how far the random participants will go, if they have an authoritative figure to transfer the moral responsibility to. Also, Milgram elaborates on the differences between a personal act and an act done under the shield of responsibility.

Chapter 2:
The two main conflicting ideas investigated in this research study are “One should not inflict suffering on a helpless person who is neither harmful nor threatening to oneself” vs “Obedience to authority.” All participants in the study were males, between 20 and 50 years old. The first 40% of the participants were workers, skilled and unskilled. The next 40% were white-collar, sales, and business related men. The final 20% of the participants were professionals. The victim, or learner, of the experiment was a 47-year-old accountant and the experimenter, or authority figure, was a 31-year-old teacher. The teacher normally turned to the experimenter for guidance around 300V, the learner stopped responding after 330V+. The study measured the teacher on a scale of 0-30, with 0 being no shocks were administered and 30 being all shock levels were administered.

Chapter 3:
Chapter 3 describes survey results where the study officials survey 110 people, who are all psychiatrists, college students, and mostly middle-class adults of various occupations. Most of them agree that study participants will not proceed shocking the learner past 150V, with only 2-4% expected to reach the end of the board.

Chapter 4:
First variation of experiment involved the teacher shocking the learner from a different room, not being able to see the learner or hear them protest. The second variation provided the teacher with voice feedback from the learner. The third variation had the learner and the teacher located in the same room, mere feet between them. The final variation required the learner to submit to the shock by placing their hand on the shocking plate. After 150V, the learner refused to put his hand on the shocking plate and the teacher/subject was told to physically force the learners hand on to the plate. The results differed extremely fromt the predictions. Nearly half of the participants proceeded all of the way to the end of the switchboard, but still claiming that they were acting against their own morals.

Chapter 5:
Chapter five is devoted to telling stories of subjects and their individual, unique reactions to the experiment. Bruno Betta, a welder, held down learner’s hand and seemed fine with it. He even said to the learner that he “...better answer and get it over with. We can’t stay here all night.” Next, a professor of Old Testament disobeyed and when told that he has “no other choice but to go on,” he responds “If this were Russia maybe, but not in America.” Then, Jan Rensaleer, an Industrial Engineer, blamed himself completely and ended up helping out with the experiment long term. I really liked the Industrial Engineer, because I like to think that I would behave like him if I were a subject in this experiment.

Chapter 6:
Chapter six introduces a new twist to the experiment, by having the learner claim to have a heart condition and bring it up repeatedly when demanding to be released from the experiment. The idea was to give subjects more reason to consider being disobedient, but 26 out of 40 still obeyed through level 30. The next variation included a weaker, less imposing experimenter and more intimidating learner. In this situation, a small drop in obedience was noted, but 50% still obey through level 30. They even introduced women as subjects and saw virtually the same results. The only difference was that during the post-study interviews, the women said that they were much more conflicted. Another interesting variation is removing the Yale influence from the studies credibility by moving the study away from the university. The only variation that produced significant changes in results was when the subjects were allowed to choose the shock level. In this situation all but one of the subjects stopped before 150 volts.

Chapter 7:
Chapter seven discusses individual examples of the variations from chapter six. Fred Prozi, who is unemployed, seemed to feel a ton of conflict, but after transferring all responsibility to the experimenter, was able to push on all of the way to level 30. Karen Dontz, a nurse and housewife, was a basketcase of a subject. She seemed like two different people, one that she really is and one that she wants people to think that she is like. One of the most interesting things about Karen Dontz is that during the interview, she guessed that most men would not comply, even though that is far from the truth. Gretchen Brandt might be my favorite subject so far. Gretchen is a recent German immigrant who works as a medical technician. She stops the experiment early and has no problem disobeying the experimenter. She even says that she was never stressed or conflicted, she just stopped when she felt that the learner was in pain and had no problem telling the experimenter to shove it.

Chapter 8:
Chapter eight investigates the possibilities of changing the authority figure’s role in the experiment. In some of the variations, the learner demands to be shocked and the experimenter says no. In this case, almost all of the subjects stop when the experimenter says to. Another variation is where another “ordinary” man gives the orders to the subject, because the experimenter took a phone call. My favorite variation is where the experimenter comes up with an excuse to be the learner.

Chapter 9:
In chapter 9, Milgram clarifies a very important distinction between conformity and obedience. Conformity describes the action of a subject when he goes along with the actions of his peers. Obedience describes when a subject complies with the orders of authority. These two definitions highlight the idea of a hierarchy, which is a social structure in which there is a clear distinction between levels. People conform to ideals and actions of peers, or people from the same hierarchy level. People obey, or carry out orders from authority figures, or people from higher hierarchical levels. I really like this idea, because it makes a lot of sense in my life. I relate this situation, and the idea of obedience, to working out. When I have an authority figure ordering me to perform a particular exercise, I am able to do it better, faster, and with less regard to my exhaustion level. If I were to try the same exercises on my own, without that authority figure, I would be much more likely to quit. I believe this has to do with not wanting to break the chain of authority and being able to separate my actions (exercising) from the consequences (tired and soreness) because an authority figure is instructing me to continue, regardless of if I want to or not.

Chapter 10:
It was obvious to early humans that obedience and the existence of a hierarchy allows for an increased chance of survival. Milgram illustrates this point by comparing a militia to a mob. The structure of the militia, with a clear hierarchy, will not only provide a higher level of organization, but also allow the militia soldiers a greater level of confidence and lack of fear, because they fear disappointing their own leader more than potentially getting injured by the mob. This provides the militia with an obvious advantage. Milgram also explains this idea in more detail by explaining the Agentic Shift, which describes when a person separates their own feelings, fears, and opinions from the situation and executes commands from an authority figure in a way that is methodical and almost robotic.

Chapter 11:
Chapter 11 investigates obedience from the beginning, looking back all of the way to early childhood. At a very young age, parents teach their kids to obey them and respect elders. This sets the stage for obedience. To further concrete these ideas of obedience, kids are sent to school, where a clear hierarchy exists. First, the students are under the teachers, which are under the principal. Once a person switches into the Agentic State, there occurs a dramatic loss in responsibility. The obedience experiment is very interesting because the subject is caught in this conflicted position where they want to obey and gain accolades from the experimenter, but they also feel conflicted and want to stop. However, if they were to stop they would have to admit that what they had done so far was wrong. Since the tasks are inherently repetitive in nature, while the subject is battling this conflict, until they actually take the leap and disobey, they are left with no choice but to continue.

Chapter 12:
In chapter 12, Milgram explains different coping mechanisms employed by the subjects to reduce stress, strain, and anxiety. Strain is a conflicting feeling experienced by the subjects, where they are battling with internal beliefs. The first, immediate source of strain comes from the physical and psychological response to the learner’s screams. Next, strain occurs as the subject continues to battle with the moral beliefs and social constraints regarding causing pain and harm to the learner. Then, some subjects felt that they were angering the learner to the point that they might physically retaliate after the experiment is over. After that, strain occurs because the subjects are receiving instructions from both the learner and the experimenter. Finally, the subjects have a certain ideal image of themselves, and shocking an innocent victim past their protests usually does not align with this image. The gap between these two ideas causes further strain.

Chapter 13:
In chapter 13, Milgram humors one of the alternative explanations for the behaviors observed, specifically the idea that human beings are inherently sadistic and enjoy causing others pain. The main counter-argument to this idea is that in experiment 11, the subject is given freedom over which level of shock to administer to the learner. The experimenter also pushes for the use of all of the levers, but almost all of the subjects do not exceed the very lower levels of shocks. While there appeared to be one or two outliers who exhibit an eagerness to harm others, Milgram successfully convinces me that a tendency towards obedience is a more likely answer to the question at hand.

Chapter 14:
Milgram devotes chapter 14 to discussing critiques of his obedience experiment. The first major concern he addresses is whether or not the group of people studied were representative of the general population. His main argument in contrast of this claim is that this experiment has been repeated at Princeton, in Munich, in Rome, in South Africa, and in Australia, and yielded similar, if not higher results of obedience to authority. Another big critique was whether or not the subjects actually believed that they were administering painful shocks. Milgram says that only 2 to 4 subjects did not believe that they were causing pain to the learner, but claims that he left their data samples in the data pool because he did not want to appear to be shaping the results and that the 2 to 4 samples would not change the overall results much anyway. I believe that Milgram defended his points quite well and did not appear childish and hostile, like John Searle when he was defending his Chinese Room argument.

Chapter 15:
One of the most interesting things about chapter 15, is that Milgram relates the theories and ideas from this book to the explanation of US soldiers’ actions in Vietnam. He explains the process that soldiers go through from the beginning of basic training to deployment in battle. Drilling hour after hour is not just so that soldiers look good when marching, but more for the establishment of obedience and the loss of individualism. The oath taken by soldiers helps reinforce their duty as an obedient member of the military. The separation of the enemy from the realm of humans, reducing them to something lower than man so that they can be killed easier. All of these ideas prepare the soldiers for extreme levels of obedience, including little to no personal guilt or responsibility.

Book Response:
While Stanley Milgram’s obedience experiments raise a lot of concerns, I believe that a lot of very interesting information can be gained from this book. While reading this book, I find myself reevaluating my decision making process. I believe that in a lot of situations I am a victim of authority, led to make a certain choice whether or not that is what I truly want. This is true of parents, popular groups of kids in school, sports teams, law enforcement, etc. I can take any one of these examples and reevaluate my thought process and trace each part to explanations made in this book. I believe that it all comes down to conflicting sources of authority and who will win someones obedience.

I even wonder if similar connections could be made to spending habits, because I tend to be an irresponsible and impulsive shopper. The ultimate authority should be my long term goals and savings plans, but sometimes I end up doing things that directly work against my goals with little to no regard for the negative side effects. I think that large corporations and groups of friends are positions of authority and push their ideas onto consumers. My friends want to go out and grab drinks or go to a concert and I want to go because I want to conform to behaviors exhibited by others in my social hierarchical level, and even though I should not spend the money, I end up doing it anyway.

Overall, I enjoyed this book because it makes me reevaluate my own decision processes. It was not as interesting as “Gang Leader for a Day,” but that is mostly because it is not a first-person narrative, but rather a documentation of a scientific study.